3 ms·

>“If the money for the next aluminum smelters would go into supporting these businesses, we would be in a much better position in Iceland in five years’ time, b

>“If the money for the next aluminum smelters would go into supporting these businesses, we would be in a much better position in Iceland in five years’ time, both economically and also just image-wise or dignity-wise,” I won't comment on the image and dignity aspects of this statement, that's not my specialty. However, the idea that green tech will be an economic winner is still magical thinking, a largely unproven assumption. Most green tech is still a money pit, and near 100% of it would be if not for massive government subsidies. And if you're not eligible for US or European subsidies, then you're probably not going to make money in green tech.

gaius 18y ago
Reykjavik runs on geothermal power. Green tech is very real in Iceland. Of course, it may not work so well where the geology isn't so suitable...
- motoko 18y ago
  "Green" is subjective. Iceland is attractive to industry because - it's largely unpopulated - it's on the ocean and near both Western Europe and the Eastern US - stable and modern government - energy is cheap Also, Iceland has not only geothermal potential, but hydroelectric potential. In short, Iceland is an potential industrial wonderland ---and all powered "green" tech, too. However, just because one isn't burning coal doesn't mean that industry is consequence free. The problem isn't environmental as I understand it, it's cultural. Icelanders pride themselves as an extremely educated, egalitarian nation. They don't want their nation polluted with the socioeconomics of heavy industry including unskilled labor, pollution, obvious social classes, foreign industrial oligarchs, and, yes, the non-Icelandic. To them, the heavy industry is tacky and crass, just like how McDonald's advertising on elementary school textbooks would be to us. Both are examples of "economical effectiveness," but neither are widely appreciated by people who would know better to choose otherwise.
  - euccastro 18y ago
    "Green" is not only about the energy sources themselves. There are lots of viable business opportunities that don't involve screwing with the landscape and environment. For example, a MMO that will soon have as many paying subscribers as Iceland has inhabitants: http://www.eve-online.com http://www.eve-online.com How much heavy industry do you really need to support a country of ~300.000 inhabitants, with a culture of work, integrity, ambition and optimism, abundance of geothermal energy sources, a healthy fishing industry and a touristically attractive landscape?
    - motoko 18y ago
      Ostensibly near zero heavy industry, unless you over-leverage your GNP by 4 times and need to pay back your international debt in something other than your now devalued currency. Also, you're right about economic opportunities that don't involve the environment, but "green" refers to technologies that replace or amortize polluting analogs, not just anything that doesn't contribute much pollution.
    - motoko 18y ago
      Off-topic: have you played EVE? I've heard that it's an extremely engaging game with a realistic game world, but that to play demands your life full time for a year.
      - euccastro 18y ago
        I've worked in Eve. 'Realistic' is not the word I'd use (it's a science fiction setting after all,) but it is indeed more a freeform and deep experience than many glorified level grinds out there, and it's true that it can absorb any amount of time if you let it.
anewaccountname 18y ago
Hydroelectric?
- Prrometheus 18y ago
  I seriously doubt her $800,000 is going to large scale industrial power projects, though you are right that they are the only economical green projects.
deleted 18y ago
[deleted]

gaius 18y ago

Reykjavik runs on geothermal power. Green tech is very real in Iceland. Of course, it may not work so well where the geology isn't so suitable...

motoko 18y ago
"Green" is subjective. Iceland is attractive to industry because - it's largely unpopulated - it's on the ocean and near both Western Europe and the Eastern US - stable and modern government - energy is cheap Also, Iceland has not only geothermal potential, but hydroelectric potential. In short, Iceland is an potential industrial wonderland ---and all powered "green" tech, too. However, just because one isn't burning coal doesn't mean that industry is consequence free. The problem isn't environmental as I understand it, it's cultural. Icelanders pride themselves as an extremely educated, egalitarian nation. They don't want their nation polluted with the socioeconomics of heavy industry including unskilled labor, pollution, obvious social classes, foreign industrial oligarchs, and, yes, the non-Icelandic. To them, the heavy industry is tacky and crass, just like how McDonald's advertising on elementary school textbooks would be to us. Both are examples of "economical effectiveness," but neither are widely appreciated by people who would know better to choose otherwise.
- euccastro 18y ago
  "Green" is not only about the energy sources themselves. There are lots of viable business opportunities that don't involve screwing with the landscape and environment. For example, a MMO that will soon have as many paying subscribers as Iceland has inhabitants: http://www.eve-online.com http://www.eve-online.com How much heavy industry do you really need to support a country of ~300.000 inhabitants, with a culture of work, integrity, ambition and optimism, abundance of geothermal energy sources, a healthy fishing industry and a touristically attractive landscape?
  - motoko 18y ago
    Ostensibly near zero heavy industry, unless you over-leverage your GNP by 4 times and need to pay back your international debt in something other than your now devalued currency. Also, you're right about economic opportunities that don't involve the environment, but "green" refers to technologies that replace or amortize polluting analogs, not just anything that doesn't contribute much pollution.
  - motoko 18y ago
    Off-topic: have you played EVE? I've heard that it's an extremely engaging game with a realistic game world, but that to play demands your life full time for a year.
    - euccastro 18y ago
      I've worked in Eve. 'Realistic' is not the word I'd use (it's a science fiction setting after all,) but it is indeed more a freeform and deep experience than many glorified level grinds out there, and it's true that it can absorb any amount of time if you let it.

anewaccountname 18y ago

Hydroelectric?

Prrometheus 18y ago
I seriously doubt her $800,000 is going to large scale industrial power projects, though you are right that they are the only economical green projects.

deleted 18y ago

[deleted]