Invade another Middle Eastern country. Trump was against it so doing it is probably good. I saw some rational good Republicans on TV telling me it was.
A complete transition to renewable energy would take years, obviously. I was scouting for for practicable solutions in the interim.
Building walkable neighborhoods requires renewable energy? Yes, that would take time too, but it's not going to happen at all if there's no demand for that to happen. And yet, I don't see a call to do that on a national level. It may be happening more on state and local levels.
I wouldn't consider this a very practical response.
I was under the assumption that you were the only who discussed this under the ambit of multiple technologies which would reduce oil & gas consumption. It's kind of an ancillary point. It does address some economics of reducing oil dependency, but as something like cars, for example, are a more advanced technology for transportation and improve quality of living with regards to transportation, I didn't consider your response wholly practical, though I do agree in increasing demand for renewable energy. I think that's more important than demand for walking, IMO. You're free to supply a different opinion.
It was considered a sensible pragmatic opinion 20 years ago. If this was incorrect, this would mean that perhaps what is considered sensible and pragmatic by society at large at any given time (thus, the "norms" of the time) isn't always so. I hope you change your opinion because otherwise we would be treading on dangerous ground. The door is opened for dangerous extremism.
My point was that there are lots of things, some of of which is technology for reducing oil and gas consumptions.
Interesting. In theory this should be politically feasible. Problem is I've never known American politics to revolve around rationality. (The stance of Republican voters towards the vaccine is one example; this would actually benefit them by keeping them alive but it appears to be a non-starter).
It seems like I keep hearing about breakthroughs in fusion.
:watermark(cdn.texastribune.org/media/watermarks/2021.png,-0,30,0)/static.texastribune.org/media/files/e4d91970366e2d7e269bb59a8c7742c7/Wind%20Energy%20Power%20Texas%20MKC%20TT%2001.jpg)
www.texastribune.org
Energy industry provides far too much campaign $$ for that to be a legitimate idea although it's entirely possible.
Ah, okay so both natural gas and wind turbines weren't winterized despite that they could be.No, frozen wind turbines aren’t the main culprit for Texas’ power outages
Lost wind power was expected to be a fraction of winter generation. All sources — from natural gas, to nuclear, to coal, to solar — have struggled to generate power during the storm that has left millions of Texans in the dark.
Seems that it was more about natural gas and less about renewables. But that blame was pretty predictable.
That and all the companies that generate power in TX all run on natural gas. This is an excellent flow chart but wow, this whole thing is like a mid level marketing scam. They're not connected to the US grid so there is no oversight and no national standards to adhere to.
:watermark(cdn.texastribune.org/media/watermarks/2022.png,-0,30,0)/static.texastribune.org/media/files/5d3cd58e589b089bbf5e9b61260f2073/WinterStorm-grid-02-v2.png)
www.texastribune.org
Does that work? Or has it worked in any previous examples? I assume it might help in the short term at least, but not long term?
