Does your hypothesis predict that Texas would be one of the most renewable-energy-heavy states in the U.S.?
replyThat’s just economics. That doesn’t excuse what the current admin has done in terms of prioritization.
replyThat "just" is really doing a lot of heavy lifting.
replyEconomics is what makes this country work. If converting to renewables makes more money, that's what will happen and the people making the money will find a way to justify it politically.
Economics only make the country work when societal costs are not externalised by those that cause them. Which they have been, always, by fossil fuel companies.
replyWhich makes it all the more remarkable given the century+ headstart fossil fuels had in entrenching itself in our political process and power structures.
replyTexas is doing something right, that’s for sure. But it’s not so clear what that thing is that the topic can be considered settled without debate.
The almighty buck wins at the end of the day. But how long the day is, that's political.
replyIt’s not a hypothesis. It’s an observation of reality. The current administration canceled massive renewable projects and has incentivized reopening coal plants, subsidized fossil fuels, and opened government land to oil drilling.
replyHow many degrees hotter will it get as a consequence? How many windmills will it take to make the world a degree colder?
replySerious question.
China is doing it the right way : use fossils but pouring that money into renewables. Use economic forces to cut the dependency . Everything else is just pipe dream building never happened utopian communism 2.0 .
reply