4 ms·
I have a real problem with statements like "100% clean energy by 2035". What does that even mean? You will have electric aircraft by 2035? Completely electric a
by throwaway9870 4y ago
I have a real problem with statements like "100% clean energy by 2035". What does that even mean? You will have electric aircraft by 2035? Completely electric ag? Electric trains and trucks? No, not a chance.
The article used the term "power" and when you click through to the energy.gov site, it is clear that it is referring to the electric grid. But you said energy and when people make that mistake I often wonder if they even know the difference.
- megaman821 4y agoWe may have electric trains and trucks. I don't think very many people are counting on transatlantic electric planes. The current plan that is being funded is synthetic aviation fuel (SAF).
- kevinak 4y agoThey don’t. Common problem when discussing electricity and energy unfortunately :/
- ajross 4y ago> What does that even mean? Uh... the linked article actually discusses exactly that. Do you disagree, or did you not read it?
- throwaway9870 4y agoYes, and I even clicked through to the energy.gov article. The article does not define what "100% clean energy" is. It doesn't even use the term 100% clean energy except in the subtitles of a couple of graphs. It uses the term "100% clean power", which again, is very sloppy. Do you understand the US uses a lot of energy besides electric? Is that going to be clean or not? If not, what does the term "100% clean energy" mean?
- ajross 4y ago
- jonstewart 4y agoAt a certain point, it's just an argument about semantics. They mean the grid.
- pstuart 4y agoBiofuel or green synfuel for aircraft seems like a fair compromise. Ag seems like it should be easy enough -- they have the space for solar or biodiesel or such. We just have to keep adjusting the incentives so that it's a natural choice.