9 ms·
Iran war energy crisis is a renewable energy wake-up call
- oldnetguy 8mo agoI would argue a nuclear one as well. Energy independence and abundance should rely on a number of sources of energy.
- Zigurd 8mo ago20 years from now and billions of dollars over budget? Or by variety do you mean wind, solar, geothermal, and hydro?
- blackjack_ 8mo agoNuclear is near dead if the new geothermal tech from fracking works out.
- OneDonOne 8mo agoThe Chinese already have a 125e Small Modular PWR that would be excellent for small islands like those of the Caribbean. It is the Linglong-1 [0]. I believe the first one cost 800 million dollars. It will be interesting to see the price reductions as it goes into serial ptoduction. [0] https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/china-start-commercial-operation-first-small-modular-nuclear-reactor-2026-2025-12-11/ https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/china-start-commerci...
- luxurytent 8mo agoI keep thinking this war will both be written down as one of the Trump administration worst mistakes while also being the catalyst for a clean(er) energy revolution. We can.. do it all, but there has been a lack of will and incentive. These incentives are strong.
- cjbgkagh 8mo agoOn the up side, perhaps this disaster will make it clear that WWIII won’t be a cakewalk and we can avoid an even more disastrous war with China.
- convolvatron 8mo agoduring the beginning of the last Iraq war, I was at a social event and somehow ended up saying that 'at least this is been so obviously foolish that it should cause us to really think twice about doing anything like it again', and someone 20 years my senior turned to me from another conversation and said 'we said the same thing about Vietnam'
- SchemaLoad 8mo agoPeople get complacent thinking the system just keeps working no matter what, and not that a lot of effort from talented people goes in to to keeping it working. So they vote in a total moron and discover the good times aren't innate.
- cjbgkagh 8mo agoI guess someone right after the Great War / the war to end all wars could be forgiven for thinking people wouldn’t be trying that again anytime soon. What I would consider different this time is that I think the US is in the looting stages of collapse and will be unable to credibly fight such a war even if a minority wanted to. I have a bit of a conspiracy theory about Trump starting the Iran war as a grift to get $200B appropriated only to abandon the region and have the money disappear.
- amelius 8mo agoMore a decentralized energy wake-up call. Though in practice that's probably the same thing.
- stavros 8mo agoI don't understand how we're still using fossil fuels. I thought the only thing that would save us from the scourge is if renewables were cheaper, but even with solar being cheaper than everything else, we're still deploying fossil fuels. Is it because of the interests of fossil fuel companies and their lobbying, or am I missing some economic factor?
- null_ptr1 8mo agoUltimately, the answer is fuel density. So, for long distance untethered travel, like planes. Beyond that, it's plastics production and chemical manufacturing. We can switch to hydrogen for lots of stuff that requires carrying your fuel on your back, but some things get tougher because the density is just not the same as a hydrocarbon. These are all surmountable (biodiesel, carbon capture->fuel cycles, bioreactors, etc), but they take time and money. In the end, what will push us to get there are economic shocks. We're getting there, it's just painful.
- kelseyfrog 8mo agoFuel density wouldn't be such an impactful attribute if the US military and geopolitical situation and strategy were different. Fuel density is logistically important and the US geographical position means that density is more important to the US than other nations. In other words, if we forecast that we'll be fighting foreign wars, fuel transport is an logistical problem that optimises for density.
- kayodelycaon 8mo agoFuel density matters to things like cars and semi-trucks. Right now you can’t build an electric version that can fully refuel in minutes. That makes fast, long-range travel impractical in an electric vehicle.
- kelseyfrog 8mo agoMe searching for the electric tanks. ¯ \ _ ༼ •́ ͜ ʖ •̀ ༽ _ / ¯ Edit: I found them :D
- cpursley 8mo agoIt’s not just about energy, but also industrial (think neon, helium) and agricultural inputs (nitrogen, urea). Even if energy was solved, there’s not really replacements for these. Well, regenerative agriculture but not sure that will feed as many people.
- paganel 8mo agoAlso, you can't make plastics out of wind power or out of solar, you still need the "petro-" that's part of the petrochemical industry.
- cluckindan 8mo agoYou can use solar to convert CO2 into syngas and do a Fischer-Tropsch synthesis followed by polymerization to get plastics.
- TheOtherHobbes 8mo agoYou can make plastics out of cellulose, which is available from plant sources or organic (algae) bioreactors. It would take a while to retool the plastics industry to use organic sources, but it's not at all impossible.
- paganel 8mo agoIs there enough cellulose available to keep Temu fully stocked? Now and in the near future. And aren’t you going to get agricultural land out of the equation in order to have space for that cellulose-planting industry? And in so doing increasing the price of basic food.
- zihotki 8mo agoThis is false, you can make many plastics without fossil sources (pla, bio-pet, bio-abs, etc). The only challenge is cost and scale - it's cheaper and easier to use existing processes.
- 8mo ago
- Joker_vD 8mo agoYeah, remember how the energy crises in the 70s served as a wake-up call and made us switch to renewable energy? Me neither. In fact, AIUI, the main consequence was the significant increase of the global oil extraction.
- dyauspitr 8mo agoHonestly the tech wasn’t there yet then. It sure is now.
- acdha 8mo agoThe technologies we’re adopting now were significantly developed by post 70s research funding. The cars people drive are massively more efficient, the houses we live in, and the appliances we buy for the same reason.
- remarkEon 8mo agoThe energy crisis in the 70s you reference coincided with a pathological and suicidal environmental movement that killed any chance for the United States to transition to nuclear power, like France did. If we had done that, or if Nixon hadn't resigned and his energy project had passed, the geopolitical situation would be remarkably different. The USSR would've probably collapsed sooner, and the center of gravity for global energy production would not be in the most volatile region on the planet today.
- herewulf 8mo agoThey did spur engineering effort to develop ICEs such that regular passenger cars in the USA could do better than 10 mpg. It was something at least. Now we have a lot of people who choose to drive far less efficient behemoths than the much more efficient ICE (or hybrid) passenger cars currently available.
- boxed 8mo agoUkraine was too...
- jmyeet 8mo agoThis war will likely go down as the dumbest geopolitical move in US history (so far, at least). And I don't think it's even close. I cannot overstate the significance of it. I think historians will mark this as at least the symbolic end of American Empire. And I don't say that lightly. It will redefine the geopolitical landscape for the rest of the century. If we're talking about renewables, one has to talk about China [1]: > In 2024 alone, China installed 360 gigawatts (GW) of wind and solar capacity. That’s more than half of global additions that year, and it brings total installed capacity to 1.4 terawatts (TW) – that’s roughly a third of the entire world’s 4.5 TW And in 2025 [2]: > Clean-energy sectors contributed a record 15.4tn yuan ($2.1tn) in 2025, some 11.4% of China’s gross domestic product (GDP) – comparable to the economies of Brazil or Canada. and > In 2025, China achieved another new record of wind and solar capacity additions. The country installed a total of 315GW solar and 119GW wind capacity, adding more solar and two times as much wind as the rest of the world combined. China has decided long ago that this was of national security interest and it has become a national project to move to renewable energy in a way that I don't think any other country is capable of and on a scale that's hard to conceptualize. Europe and the US have shown themselves to be completely incapable of planning long term and acting in national interest with regards for fossil fuels. There's no poliitical will. Both are captured by the interests of enriching the billionaire class in the short term. When it all goes to shit, which it will, they'll all leave and/or the rest of us will pay for this lack of foresight. [1]: https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/12/china-adding-more-renewables-to-grid/ https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/12/china-adding-more-re... [2]: https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-clean-energy-drove-more-than-a-third-of-chinas-gdp-growth-in-2025/ https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-clean-energy-drove-more...
- TheOtherHobbes 8mo agoAt some point we're going to have to have a conversation about the destructive toxicity of conservatism. There's been no bigger brake on progress of all kinds, and the ends have always been corrupt, self-serving, and small-minded.
- jmyeet 8mo agoJust looking at the US, one can certainly point fingers at conservatism (rightly so) but I think that's missing the forest for the trees. Why? Because the so-called opposition party, the Democratic Party, is complicit is everything that's happened to get us to this point. The problem isn't conservatism per se. It's neoliberalism (IMHO). Even more broadly, it's capitalism. There's a meme in this space that basically goes something like "when you learn about capitalism, you become either a communist or a liar". I read something recently about how people fetishize the 1950s, particularly on the political right. A big part of what made that possible was exploitation. Obviously we had a permanent underclass since segregation was still alive and well. A lot of these "middle class" families had "help" or "a girl". But another form of exploitation was oil. We were basically stealing oil from the Middle East for pennies on the dollar. And then Iran came out and said "maybe we don't want you to steal our oil", we couped their government, we installed our own puppet government, we continued stealing oil and this all ultimately lead to the 1970s oil crisis and the Iranian Revolution. And here we are. Back to the US political landscape, just look at the "opposition" to this war. It's either nonexistent or it's process-based ("Congress should've approved it"), not substantive. No mainstream political force is saying what we should be saying, which is that our Middle East policy is a crime, the sanctions on Iran were and are a crime and that continued exploitation of this region is unsustainable.
- christophilus 8mo agoIf there is ever a war with China, that will be a fossil fuel wake-up call, at least she it comes to solar panels and batteries.
- nradov 8mo agoWhat up call for whom? The USA is a net fossil fuel exporter. China is still heavily dependent on fossil fuel imports (as well as fertilizer produced from natural gas) and those imports would be interdicted in any major conflict. Of course the Chinese leadership is well aware of that vulnerability and taking steps to mitigate it.
- acdha 8mo agoThe U.S. exports fossil, yes, but we import a huge amount as well because many of our refineries aren’t setup to process light sweet crude and it’s also often cheaper to buy oil, refine, and use it on the coast than it is to move it across the country from somewhere in the Dakotas. If we had a war with China, it’d go much worse given their much greater resources and knowledge of how to hit those import routes for maximum impact.
- nradov 8mo agoChina has virtually zero conventional capability to interdict those sea lines of communication. Their navy and air force doesn't have the range, logistics, or foreign bases necessary to accomplish that mission. They're building fast so the situation may change in a few years but not today.
- acdha 8mo agoThey’re not going head to head in a naval battle (yet) but oil tankers aren’t hardened targets and they wouldn’t need to be in American airspace to attack ships leaving Saudi Arabi or Iraq bound for California. All you’d need would be one drone attack to shut commercial shipping down for ages since crews and owners aren’t going to jump to become military targets. I’m certain that, like like the U.S. military planners, the Chinese military has a team updating plans based on which Iranian tactics get results. If nothing else, one way to start a move on Taiwan would be some kind of diversion pulling U.S. resources away escorting shipping. (That’s ignoring the larger economic impact of all of the other shipping which originates in China)
- neogodless 8mo agoRelated: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47437516 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47437516 Iran war energy shock sparks global push to reduce fossil fuel dependence (reuters.com) ~3 days prior, 447+ commments
- gnarlouse 8mo agoThe Iran War crisis is a billionaire alignment problem wakeup call, too.
- chaostheory 8mo agoRenewable energy just has bad marketing. Instead of just emphasizing their environmental benefits, everyone forgot that they’re also a stop gap for any issues with other sources of energy. China gets it. It’s the same reason why EVs are so important: they give us energy source flexibility. An EV can run on anything that creates electricity which includes coal, nuclear, natural gas, oil, in addition to renewables
- Zigurd 8mo agoAlso solar and wind are much more often on time and on budget.
- AnotherGoodName 8mo agoEveryone should look at what's happening in Australia. Australia has 50% more solar per capita than China and utterly dwarfs the USA and Europe on a per capita basis. Because of this Australians have consistently falling power prices. Think about that. Falling power prices during high inflation with an energy crisis at a time when datacenters are being built out everywhere. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-03-19/power-prices-fall-but-relief-could-be-short-due-to-iran-war/106461930 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-03-19/power-prices-fall-but... You'll note on that link in 1 year prices have gone from $87 to $50. Pretty much all attributable to the massive grid connected battery installations and renewable rollouts which had minimal subsidies. They were merely encouraged by policy which created a shorter time for grid price changes and arbitration allowing high response batteries to drive grid efficiencies. https://elements.visualcapitalist.com/top-20-countries-by-battery-storage-capacity/ https://elements.visualcapitalist.com/top-20-countries-by-ba... It's straightforward economics at this point. Want cheaper prices? Demand what Australia has.
- testing22321 8mo agoNot just falling energy prices. Australians are about to get free electricity for 3 hours a day.
- stared 8mo agoSee a wider perspective on how energy sources shape geopolitics: "The pivot" by Charlie Stross https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45621074 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45621074. And yes, solar energy is not only greener (less CO2, less PM2.5), but also frees us from dependency on other countries. The future can be less centralized. Some countries (Russia included) will lose their bargaining chip. Other countries (USA included) will lose the incentive to 'democratize' the Middle East.
- sieabahlpark 8mo ago[dead]
- OneDonOne 8mo agoAnd how will renewables like solar and wind wirk with Class 8 trucks, shipping, aviation or process heat or as feedstock? How have they worked in Germany, which has shut down her nuclear plants and Russian hydrocarbons? Please - tell us.
- stared 8mo ago> Please - tell us. No need of sarcasm here. Or going the route of a false dichotomy. Again, not all dependencies can be eliminated. But it is better to have less dependencies. Closing nuclear plants in Germany was a disaster, and here we agree.
- OneDonOne 8mo agoOne of those dependencies w.r.t large solar panel buildouts, will be charcoal. [0] And lots of it. [0] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335083312_Why_do_we_burn_coal_and_trees_to_make_solar_panels https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335083312_Why_do_we...
- triceratops 8mo agoSolar panels are recyclable. Once you have enough for your needs you can stop burning charcoal. You can never stop burning oil if all you use is oil. Also I wasn't aware you could extract oil, gas, and coal with no environmental impact. I must have just dreamed the words Deepwater Horizon.
- sb057 8mo agoI am speaking from a position of total ignorance, so this is probably a dumb take, but I don't see why rich nations[1] don't simply subsidize mass nuclear energy production as state policy. The two main issues with nuclear are unit cost (solvable if you build dozens/hundreds in serial production) and financing (a reactor with a 30 year payback period is much more viable with 3.5% sovereign financing compared to 8% private bonds). France did it 50 years ago with more primitive reactor designs. China is currently doing it somewhat halfheartedly. I bet if the U.S. committed to $2 trillion to one standardized design and heavily used eminent domain, America would have knocked electricity costs down by half within a decade. [1] Honestly probably only really viable in China and the U.S. plus maybe South Korea; nuclear is unpopular in Japan after Fukushima, and I doubt the E.U. would be able to coordinate everything. Everyone else is probably too poor outside of petrostates, which have the whole petro thing going on.
- alephnerd 8mo ago> I don't see why rich nations[1] don't simply subsidize mass nuclear energy production as state policy > Honestly probably only really viable in China and the U.S. plus maybe South Korea Because it costs a lot of money. For example, India quietly (by HN and Reddit standards) passed a nuclear energy megabill in December which has a TAM of $214 Billion [0]. French (EDF), American (Westinghouse, Holtec, GE Vernova Hitachi), Russian (Rosatom), and Korean (Hyundai) JVs with Indian Public (NPTC, BHEL) and Private (Tata, L&T, Jindal Group) players are now able to build and distribute nuclear energy without dealing with an older SOE and can subsidize the buildout [1] using Green Bonds, which gives them access to around $56 Billion in capital [2] with an added . These players will also be eligible for India's $2.5 Billion SMR subsidy [3]. This also helps India's $160 Billion data center buildout [4] which is being subsidized by the Indian government [5], and piggybacks on India's $205 Billion infrastructure buildout [6]. Other countries can do that as well, but if they are fine spending tens to hundreds of billions of dollars - that's where the blocker arises, but most of the players with this technology are now backlogged with orders from this buildout in India and other existing and in-progress buildouts. > outside of petrostates, which have the whole petro thing going on The UAE [7] is participating in financing India's nuclear buildout as part of their defense pact. [0] - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-12-08/india-sees-new-nuclear-bill-spurring-projects-worth-214-billion https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-12-08/india-see... [1] - https://powermin.gov.in/sites/default/files/Seeking_comments_on_Draft_National_Electricity_Policy_2026.pdf https://powermin.gov.in/sites/default/files/Seeking_comments... [2] - https://www.climatebonds.net/news-events/press-room/press-releases/indias-sustainable-debt-market-tops-usd-55-9-billion-new-mufg-cbi-report-maps-rapid-growth-pathways-2030 https://www.climatebonds.net/news-events/press-room/press-re... [3] - https://www.trade.gov/market-intelligence/india-energy-small-modular-reactors https://www.trade.gov/market-intelligence/india-energy-small... [4] - https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2227953®=3&lang=2 https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2227953&re... [5] - https://techcrunch.com/2026/02/01/india-offers-zero-taxes-through-2047-to-lure-global-ai-workloads/ https://techcrunch.com/2026/02/01/india-offers-zero-taxes-th... [6] - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2025-06-12/india-s-second-infrastructure-wave-could-draw-205-billion-modi-s-third-term https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2025-06-12/india-... [7] - https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/india-uae-announce-trade-nuclear-cooperation-modis-infra-invite-126011901257_1.html https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/india-uae-annou...
- le-mark 8mo ago> First they’ll take our gasoline cars then our guns!!! Courtesy of Fox News.
- vmsp 8mo agoAs a Portuguese I have a more nuanced view of these type of takes. We invested _heavily_ and prematurely in renewable energies -- see my comment from a couple of years ago [0]. Since then, our energy prices were high for a while and now they're not much lower than the EU's average because all that investment needs to be amortized [1]. Two years ago, we ran a whole month on renewables [2]. Despite this, our increase in energy prices since the Iran war started has been dramatic and the price of everything has been going up significantly. I can't help but think about the ROI on all those renewables if they can't help make our lives easier at a time like this. I'd much rather we go nuclear. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37719568 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37719568 [1]: https://eco.sapo.pt/2026/03/11/precos-da-eletricidade-e-gas-em-portugal-abaixo-da-media-europeia-excecao-e-o-gas-para-as-casas/ https://eco.sapo.pt/2026/03/11/precos-da-eletricidade-e-gas-... [2]: https://www.portugalglobal.pt/en/news/2024/april/renewable-energy-supplies-91-of-electricity-in-portugal/ https://www.portugalglobal.pt/en/news/2024/april/renewable-e...
- gnabgib 8mo ago> I'd much rather we go nuclear. I think/hope you mean "I'd rather we adopt/use nuclear energy."
- mrsilencedogood 8mo agoI don't think anyone was at risk of misunderstanding their intent...
- rickydroll 8mo agoSome of the people at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue might willfully misunderstand.
- donkeybeer 8mo agoI don't see any harm in either. Europe understands the need for developing self defence.
- AnotherGoodName 8mo ago
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- OneDonOne 8mo agoModern civilization requires semiconductors, concrete, asphalt, fertilizer, and plastics to function. Never mind aviation and marine fuel to function. All of these require hydrocarbons. As long as that is the case, renewable power will continue to be a niche.
- torpfactory 8mo agoIt’s really not niche anymore. It’s the dominant form of new electrical power generation and has been for a few years. https://www.publicpower.org/system/files/documents/Americas-Electricity-Generation-Capacity-2025-Update.pdf https://www.publicpower.org/system/files/documents/Americas-...
- adrian_b 8mo agoFossil hydrocarbons are not really needed. Even during WWII Germany had to synthesize much of its hydrocarbon fuel. Also after the war there has been large-scale production of synthetic hydrocarbons, but eventually this was abandoned due to the low price of fossil oil. It is possible to synthesize hydrocarbons from syngas, which can be made from carbon dioxide and water, with solar energy. If the carbon dioxide is extracted from air, that requires much more energy than when a concentrated source of CO2 is available, but with essentially free solar energy it would still be feasible. Obviously, this will not be done as long as cheaper fossil hydrocarbons are offered. However the use of fossil hydrocarbons for plastic, asphalt or other applications that do not release CO2 is not harmful.
- OneDonOne 8mo ago> Even during WWII Germany had to synthesize much of its hydrocarbon fuel. Germany [0], as well as Apartheid South Africa (SASOL), and now China, synthesized that fuel from coal. Which is itself a fossil fuel. [0] https://warhistory.org/@msw/article/synthetic-production-of-gasoline https://warhistory.org/@msw/article/synthetic-production-of-... > Obviously, this will not be done as long as cheaper fossil hydrocarbons are offered. However the use of fossil hydrocarbons for plastic, asphalt or other applications that do not release CO2 is not harmful. The issue with any fuel/feedstock production is not just the financial cost but the amount of energy returned on the energy invested. A modern civilization (like Japan) requires 10:1. Synfuels made using the method you described are 1:1 - they provide as much energy as it takes to make them.
- maxdo 8mo agoright now the main real renewable is solar, solar , is almost controlled by china, another country to start the war quite soon :) sure. the wake up call for EU , US , and rest of the west that is not happening, that national interest is a real thing. Not a fiction.
- Bender 8mo agoHow much impact do petrochemicals have on renewables? e.g. Ethylene used for plastics, propylene, butadiene for synthetic rubber and aromatics like benzene. Do renewables still exist at the same volume and cost without petrochemicals or when their costs sky-rocket during a war? How many here have stocked up on solar panels, charge controllers, wire, terminal blocks, high current fuses, home grid batteries, inverters and such? The only thing I am missing is solar panels. Currently I charge my batteries with a generator when commercial power is out. I backed out on a solar panel deal for a bunch of dumb reasons. I run my computer and network equipment on inverters 100% of the time to clean up commercial power and deal with the rare brown outs from tension breakers reclosers during high wind events.
- asdff 8mo agoI think no matter what your energy source it is liable to be precision struck back to the stone age in this era within days by a motivated group. People need to come to terms with this new reality. I fear too many people think we are still fighting like last centuries wars.
- senordevnyc 8mo agoLet’s say that’s true. Now what? We obviously can’t stop energy production, so what’s the best source? It seems obvious to me that the most resilient form of energy production is billions (trillions?) of dirt cheap solar panels across the globe. Sure you can take some out, but it’s hard to take out enough to matter, and your bombs are way more expensive than the panels they’re taking out. What’s more resilient than solar?
- asdff 8mo agoNothing is in the western context. Resilient is developing Africa where people already know how to live without regular electricity. Or the US in 1926. Kind of interesting how electrifying the countryside has lead to such an unintended and ever present Achilles tendon for western nations. In the future we might go to war to protect AC units in Phoenix.
- senordevnyc 8mo agoThis could be applied to any modern infrastructure, or even agriculture itself. So your position is that all of modernity is inherently not resilient? I don't really agree, but more to the point, it seems pointless in the extreme to even bother discussing it. Maybe the only way to be "resilient" as a species is to return to hunter gatherer societies, but basically no one wants that. Including all those people in "developing Africa".
- asdff 8mo agoI do think that. Consider that there was a time when a higher percentage of the population had the skillset they needed to go off, make all the tools they needed to live off the land and survive the year. People turned to that in this country in the great depression, at least in part in certain skills. But it allowed for survival and a partial set of modern amenities. Living without gasoline or power thanks to knowing how to split wood and cook over a fire. Being able to eat meat tonight thanks to being able to identify a game trail, snare a squirrel, process, and cook it, without a dime spent. Replace developing africa with developing anywhere that has a large amount of people on the poverty line relying at least in part on honed skills to cover what they can't afford of modern life. In the united states this lifestyle by and large doesn't exist at least among the impovershed, although it is hobby for the rich who can afford the gear. It isn't like homeless people in say Sacramento know how to fletch arrows or track grouse. They are wholly dependent on modern life through the welfare state and the social services they receive, or what waste streams perhaps they might on occasion subsist on from modern life. In either case, I've never seen a starving homeless person in the United States in whatever state they might be in, and I've never seen one having to fletch arrows either. That skillset is lost, as it isn't necessary any more. And when the bombs fly and all those modern supply chains fall apart, guess what population of humanity is most primed to shrug it off and apply learned skills to the problem. It sure isn't people in Sacramento.
- ramon156 8mo agoIn a perfect world we're solar/wind/nuclear/whatever powered, and every city/town has their iwn battery grid. Grids can take/give from each other, and they're COMMUNITY OWNED (!) Sadly elec. companies are not a fan of this
- ZeroGravitas 8mo agoWell hopefully. People have noticed that the weird social media bot accounts that are usually posting in the UK about Muslim immigrants have all suddenly shifted to talking about drilling for more oil in the north sea. This is a bad idea for multiple reasons, but clearly someone wants you to think that is the solution rather than wind, solar, batteries, evs and heat pumps. They've partially succeeded each time we've gone through this kind of fossil energy crisis, and they'll likely partially succeed this time. I'd guess the propaganda is slightly harder to make in the 70% of countries where they import fossil fuels and the political/media landscape isn't so broken that they can pretend otherwise to dig themselves deeper into a hole.
- lemoncookiechip 8mo agoTotally agree, although an issue that's not talked about enough is that this isn't simply an energy crisis, but a logistics crisis for other products from the region (helium, fertilizers, rare minerals, etc) and to the region that affect other sectors of our global economy highly. Also another issue that's not being talked about at all is the impact the war will have in displacing a population of 90 million people. For reference, Syria only had 20 million people and the impact was quite big, although we're still far from reaching that point for now.