4 ms·

I really don't see the types of energy as a partisan issue at all anymore, compared to policies that threaten to put the US on a dependence on foreign sources o

I really don't see the types of energy as a partisan issue at all anymore, compared to policies that threaten to put the US on a dependence on foreign sources of energy. Nobody wants to burn dirty coal if they can help it, but coal plants in lieu of importing oil as long as there isn't any smog around their homes, most people would take the former. Granted those families or counties that historically have depended economically on specific forms of energy, it's another story, but they're a relatively small segment of the population.

StavrosK 5y ago
Unfortunately, there is partisanship among clean energy proponents, they're split into the nuclear party and the solar/wind party, and they keep fighting each other while we keep burning fossil fuels. It's a textbook display of the narcisissm of small differences: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism_of_small_differences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism_of_small_difference...
danans 5y ago
> Nobody wants to burn dirty coal if they can help it, but coal plants in lieu of importing oil Outside of a few places (i.e Hawaii) oil is not burned for electricity, so in that sense there isn't really a trade off between coal and oil in that way. When electric vehicles become broadly prevalent, then the tradeoff will exist, but only if we haven't done the job of deploying enough renewables by that time.
danaris 5y ago
> Nobody wants to burn dirty coal if they can help it This is, sadly, very much untrue. Climate change, and particularly the way our energy sources affect it, have become so partisan that I have seen people with strong right-wing leanings express the desire to burn the dirtiest coal they can, as dirty as they can possibly burn it, largely to "own the libs".
MisterBastahrd 5y ago
That's just not true. There are people who absolutely want other people to burn dirty coal because aligning themselves with the coal industry affects their bottom line in a positive way. The Republican Party of Texas is highly anti-regulation when it comes to energy sources. Much of the party constituents' money is tied up in oil and gas. They were completely fine with people losing property and time if it could be used as a political wedge issue to get more donations. I lost all the food in my house because I was without power for a week in the recent ice storms. Several of my pipes were damaged despite my best efforts to mitigate the issue. My work week was completely disrupted, and I was forced to scramble to keep my family and family pets warm. I wasn't remotely alone. There is still no effort by the state to winterize the state's energy grid. Turns out that once your home costs past a certain point out here, you're probably running gas and they start to include generators too.

StavrosK 5y ago

Unfortunately, there is partisanship among clean energy proponents, they're split into the nuclear party and the solar/wind party, and they keep fighting each other while we keep burning fossil fuels. It's a textbook display of the narcisissm of small differences: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism_of_small_differences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism_of_small_difference...

danans 5y ago

> Nobody wants to burn dirty coal if they can help it, but coal plants in lieu of importing oil Outside of a few places (i.e Hawaii) oil is not burned for electricity, so in that sense there isn't really a trade off between coal and oil in that way. When electric vehicles become broadly prevalent, then the tradeoff will exist, but only if we haven't done the job of deploying enough renewables by that time.

danaris 5y ago

> Nobody wants to burn dirty coal if they can help it This is, sadly, very much untrue. Climate change, and particularly the way our energy sources affect it, have become so partisan that I have seen people with strong right-wing leanings express the desire to burn the dirtiest coal they can, as dirty as they can possibly burn it, largely to "own the libs".

MisterBastahrd 5y ago

That's just not true. There are people who absolutely want other people to burn dirty coal because aligning themselves with the coal industry affects their bottom line in a positive way. The Republican Party of Texas is highly anti-regulation when it comes to energy sources. Much of the party constituents' money is tied up in oil and gas. They were completely fine with people losing property and time if it could be used as a political wedge issue to get more donations. I lost all the food in my house because I was without power for a week in the recent ice storms. Several of my pipes were damaged despite my best efforts to mitigate the issue. My work week was completely disrupted, and I was forced to scramble to keep my family and family pets warm. I wasn't remotely alone. There is still no effort by the state to winterize the state's energy grid. Turns out that once your home costs past a certain point out here, you're probably running gas and they start to include generators too.