4 ms·
Unfortunately many leftists are more interested in manipulating green energy to meet their unrelated political goals than solving global warming. If a green pow
by woah 5y ago
Unfortunately many leftists are more interested in manipulating green energy to meet their unrelated political goals than solving global warming. If a green power project does not also bring about an international dictatorship of the proletariat to free the world from corporate oppression, they are happy to block it. They never mention that their obstructionism is an affirmative vote in favor of our current unsustainable practices.
In this case, the article's author is worried that Desertec, while much cleaner, and a clear environmental win, could replicate some of the political dynamics of oil extraction in the middle east.
He pretends that he would like to see "decentralized small-scale projects that can be democratically managed and controlled by local communities that promote energy autonomy". But has this been created? No. By opposing actual real projects, he is voting to keep extracting and burning oil. With this article, he is actively promoting oil and the dictatorships propped up by it, while pretending to fight against injustice.
- omegaworks 5y agoSo we just have to be ok creating new systems that reproduce the extractive, abusive relationships between Europe and Africa that existed in the past (and continue to exist today)? Build a conveyor belt that literally transmits the solar resources of African countries to Europe that does not guarantee that Africans actually benefit from the transaction? The climate crisis should not be used as an excuse for rich countries to plunder underdeveloped ones.
- woah 5y agoSunlight is renewable, and will not run out
- photochemsyn 5y agoYes, it's a pretty common phenomenon. Placing ideology before practical results doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Just build the system, please. There is however a way for an industrialized nation to partner with a developing country for such projects in a mutually beneficial manner, rather than using the strict old-school colonial plantation model. For example, I note that Saudi Arabia's role in the global oil market - which was due to the USA's investment in Saudi Arabia - has done far more to drive local development than the French 'partnership' with Niger's uranium mines has done to drive the development of that country. Niger supplies about a third of France's uranium, but get basically nothing in return: > "According to the World Bank, around 60 percent of Nigeriens live below the national poverty line. With a per capita income of $420, Niger is one of the world’s poorest nations. In 2016, it ranked 187 out of 188 countries on the United Nations Human Development Index." I get the sense that China is offering better deals to African nations than Europe or the USA is, but that's very iffy too.
- 908B64B197 5y ago> For example, I note that Saudi Arabia's role in the global oil market - which was due to the USA's investment in Saudi Arabia - has done far more to drive local development than the French 'partnership' with Niger's uranium mines has done to drive the development of that country. Niger supplies about a third of France's uranium, but get basically nothing in return: Every country in the world needs oil. You can buy refined oil products at every corner store of the planet. SA's oil is also easy to extract, so it's a rather low tech operation. It's not the case with uranium. There are very few buyers and the tech required to mine and handle it as well as to use it isn't widespread. Without France buying and funding the mine it it's questionable whether there would be a mine at all. For a solar farm, every country with a coastline and useable land will be offered a chance to bid and the lowest bidder will get the contract.