Fresh Start Political Thread

[BaltimoreSkins]

Cred I agree in regards to petroleum as of now we use it in so many products and it is essential for travel. Electric cars are making great headways but for people to take them seriously you need to be able to pull of the highway and get a full charge in 3 minutes, the average time it takes to fill a sedan in the United States until then you won't get serious buy in.

Coal I have to disagree. While yes it is the most energy dense it is just awful from a human health, environment and economic stand point. Coal has been phasing itself out but far to slowly. At the turn of the century it was 60% of our electrical generation portfolio. Flashforward 20 years later and it is less than 20%. We generate more from nuclear now (even though the amount from nuclear has stayed the same). The reason is because of natural gas far cleaner, less air and aquatic pollutants, less climate change impact, easier to transport the list goes on.

I also tend to disagree with you on renewables. The last twenty years we have been so far behind subsidizing it. The amount we subsidize coal, oil and natural gas is insane. You can always argue they are bigger shares of the profile therefore deserve higher subsidies. We could all chip in by a lease on federal land for $2 and acre and probably pull in 1 million a year in profits. None of the presidents we have had this century have invested seriously in renewables. Right now we have the ability to provide all our electrical needs from photovoltaic and wind during daytime and use nuclear and natural gas at night regardless of battery storage. We just lack effective national leadership to work it out.

SD I imagine we could get that 0% up to at least 2%.

Chico you mentioned the Green New Deal the problem with it IMO is we should have been working on energy conservation strategies 45 years ago. It is kind of like the shit show SD's state is in with fires. Most fire prone areas of the world began moving power underground. California instead of investing bit by bit just ignored it and now spend billions of dollars on fire issues a year (awesome job Newsome) or the school district that doesn't put money towards maintaining infrastructure and then we are stuck with collapsing school buildings and they say it is too expensive to fix we yeah you have ignored it for a half a century of course it is.

If I had my way the two biggest things I would focus on are conservation of energy and energy efficiency for some reason we have really struggled there but it makes the most direct and immediate impact.

[BaltimoreSkins]

I also cringe at using nonrenewable resources for single use purposes it just seems so illogical to me.

[SunnySide]

Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins

I also cringe at using nonrenewable resources for single use purposes it just seems so illogical to me.

Not to sound like a pruis driving portland librarian ... but single use plastic kills me. Think of all the single use plastic just within 5 feet of you right now.

Biodegradable should be the goal asap imo.

[CRedskinsRule]

Can you show links on this part of your post

Right now we have the ability to provide all our electrical needs from photovoltaic and wind during daytime and use nuclear and natural gas at night regardless of battery storage.

I highly doubt that is true. The amount of energy lost in transmitting generated electricity a huge issue that is being worked on by scientists across the globe.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[BaltimoreSkins]

Cred here you go:
https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/arti...k#!divAbstract


It is not just we can start putting up photovoltaics and boom we would need to bring our electrical grid into the 21st century something we don't have the political will power to do.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins

Cred here you go:

https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/arti...k#!divAbstract





It is not just we can start putting up photovoltaics and boom we would need to bring our electrical grid into the 21st century something we don't have the political will power to do.

From the abstract

However, to reliably meet 100% of total annual electricity demand, seasonal cycles and unpredictable weather events require several weeks’ worth of energy storage and/or the installation of much more capacity of solar and wind power than is routinely necessary to meet peak demand

It goes on to talk about meeting 80%demand and also the issues around transmission.

The bottomline is that it is unrealistic to think solar/wind can consistently and reliably provide the energy needs of this country. There isn't even a path to that point, and there definitely isn't the political will or financial means to make it happen. Nor is it a responsible thing to do when there are better, more effective and far cheaper ways to meet the demand.

There are motives behind the scare tactics of eco-green proponents that have little to nothing to do with the global climate and everything to do with intruding government into the daily person's life.

As I said, take away the private jets and make people conserve in flights would do more for the climate than all the wind towers in Kansas (and there are a lot of them)

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

[MTK]

Let's not forget the fossil fuels lobby has tremendous influence around the world and they spend a ton of $$ to make sure we stay hooked on them.

Might as well burn them while we got them

[JackLord]

Originally Posted by MTK

Let's not forget the fossil fuels lobby has tremendous influence around the world and they spend a ton of $$ to make sure we stay hooked on them.

Might as well burn them while we got them

More likely it is that fossil fuels still give us the best bang for the buck. When alternatives become more economically viable (see my CD Player example above) then the consumer (that's you and me) will not only embrace alternatives, but also demand them. And that demand will be met.

In the long run, you cannot stop the Market.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by MTK

Let's not forget the fossil fuels lobby has tremendous influence around the world and they spend a ton of $$ to make sure we stay hooked on them.

Might as well burn them while we got them

Very worthy:

Exxon's senior director for federal relations was caught on tape talking about Exxon's private strategy for dealing with climate change.

And yet I suspect nothing will happen.

[JackLord]

Originally Posted by mooby

Very worthy:

Exxon's senior director for federal relations was caught on tape talking about Exxon's private strategy for dealing with climate change.

And yet I suspect nothing will happen.

If history has shown us anything, the tide of technological change cannot be stopped.

When Solar Power, for example, becomes economically viable, nothing will stop it from becoming widespread. Exxon can either jump on the bandwagon or get out of the way.

[BaltimoreSkins]

Cred it would have been realistic if we would have county to develop and invest in infrastructure. I also don’t see how improving building codes using federal funds to develop city and state owned systems is any more infringing than what the government has done to push coal. How much more tax dollars are you willing to spend to keep that industry a float?

[JackLord]

Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins

Cred it would have been realistic if we would have county to develop and invest in infrastructure. I also don’t see how improving building codes using federal funds to develop city and state owned systems is any more infringing than what the government has done to push coal. How much more tax dollars are you willing to spend to keep that industry a float?

Considering a good many of those miners vote and their Senator is the de facto swing vote, I reckon a lot.

[SunnySide]

Former President Donald Trump may still wield the most political power over the Republican Party, but Mitch McConnell remains master of the Senate GOP.

Despite repeated calls by Trump to oppose the bipartisan infrastructure package, McConnell largely ignored -- and ultimately defied -- the former president by voting for final passage on Tuesday and delivering 18 other Republicans with him.

The final vote for $550 billion in new spending for roads, bridges, waterways, airports and broadband internet was 69-30. It is a rarity in Washington -- a genuinely significant bipartisan achievement for both parties and President Joe Biden, who anchored his run for the White House on his ability to bring people together.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/aye-vote-...180202820.html

A bi-partisan bill being passed?

When was the last time this happened?

Mark Levin wants the 18 republicans tried for treason ... I used to halfway like that guy.

[BaltimoreSkins]

Originally Posted by SunnySide

Former President Donald Trump may still wield the most political power over the Republican Party, but Mitch McConnell remains master of the Senate GOP.

Despite repeated calls by Trump to oppose the bipartisan infrastructure package, McConnell largely ignored -- and ultimately defied -- the former president by voting for final passage on Tuesday and delivering 18 other Republicans with him.

The final vote for $550 billion in new spending for roads, bridges, waterways, airports and broadband internet was 69-30. It is a rarity in Washington -- a genuinely significant bipartisan achievement for both parties and President Joe Biden, who anchored his run for the White House on his ability to bring people together.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/aye-vote-...180202820.html

A bi-partisan bill being passed?

When was the last time this happened?

Mark Levin wants the 18 republicans tried for treason ... I used to halfway like that guy.

There were alot of corporate handouts in that bill. That is the only way we will ever get a bipartisan bill. The corporate dems have to keep their overlords happy. Sorry I am a bit jaded because I wanted the 3.9 bill passed first help real Americans and not corps but the infrastructure is good. Yea! Welcome to the the year 2021 USA you're the last developed country here.

[SunnySide]

Originally Posted by BaltimoreSkins

There were alot of corporate handouts in that bill. That is the only way we will ever get a bipartisan bill. The corporate dems have to keep their overlords happy. Sorry I am a bit jaded because I wanted the 3.9 bill passed first help real Americans and not corps but the infrastructure is good. Yea! Welcome to the the year 2021 USA you're the last developed country here.

About 10 million homes still have lead pipes and this will address that. Finally being able to say there are no lead pipes and all american houses have clean water is a win.

bringing broadband to the rural parts is a win.

fixing some of these roads and bridges will be a win. I did lots of driving from Montgomery County to Annapolis to havre de grace last few days and we need some major bridge/road repair.

------------

Nearly 67,000 of the nation’s 605,000 bridges are rated “structurally deficient” and are in need of substantial repair or replacement, according to bridge inspections analyzed in The Fix We’re In For: The State of the Nation’s Bridges 2013. Nearly 8,000 are both structurally deficient and “fracture critical”, meaning they are designed with no redundancy in their key structural components, so that if one fails the bridge could collapse. The Federal Highway Administration estimates that the backlog of troubled bridges would cost $76 billion to eliminate.

The report ranks states and the District of Columbia in terms of the overall condition of the their bridges, with one having the largest share of deficient bridges, 51 the lowest. Twenty-one states have a higher percentage of deficient bridges than the national average of 11 percent. The five states with the worst bridge conditions have a share over 20 percent: Pennsylvania has the largest share of deteriorating bridges (24.5%), followed by Oklahoma (22.0%), Iowa (21.7%), Rhode Island (21.6%), and South Dakota (20.3%).

https://t4america.org/2013/06/19/one...ears-50-years/

----------

The need is growing rapidly, the report notes: While most bridges are designed to last 50 years before major overhaul or replacement, American bridges average 43 years old. Age is a major factor in bridge conditions. Roughly half of the structurally deficient bridges are 65 or older.Jun 19, 2013