Dave's intro would make an excellent script that the solar, wind, storage, etc. industries should be blasting from the mountaintops 24/7 on all media and instead we have radio silence from the industry. The fossil fuel industry does this with lies all the time. They may be evil, but they are not stupid!
Really, the D(s) have become such a sleazy brand name -- they bring dis-credit to the Green Realm. Overall, Renewable, and Electrification would likely be better dis-associated from the D(s).
Earth, you may want to visit sometime. Meanwhile -- PLEASE Neither D nor R represent Green. Most of US would rather not be associated with EITHER of you.
Example: I don't know where it came from, perhaps because I've been on the website of Renewable Energy and Wildlife Institute (REWI.org, great group no one hears about), but all of a sudden I get these online adds from Chevron with nice wildlife experts telling me how they really watch out for the antelope, etc. Inline in the NY Times, even while I'm at RenewEconomy.com.au. Then in audio as an add on some pod. Wow!
Man o' man, I could go on forever! Thank you Dave and Steve. I was interested to hear more about the 8500 influencers who are going to make "Signal" go viral. To me, it's great to get "information" about the worldwide dominance of WindSolarBatteriesElectrification (WSBE) to the legislators, staff, corp whoever, but it needs to get to the masses. Along with a bit of "lighten up on the enviro impacts" which the FF biz has used to demonize WSBE among those who should be its greatest proponents but who are easily swayed by "habitat, wildlife, views, extraction, toxics, safety, farmland, conserve, preserve..." And yeah, that Chinese spyware.
Not sure I think it's a great idea to focus first on "transmission." Here in CO I've been to the sites of four would-be solar 100ish MW farms, right next to ginormous transmission, even w/substations, which had permits denied by counties. Transmission was ready, but maybe now we need to extend it, overwork it, to go further afield to get the solar that NM & UT are building. Wanna play rough, how 'bout, "Boycott Steamboat, Boycott Telluride, Boycott Durango and Mesa Verde." (Really, Routt, San Miguel, La Plata and Montezuma Counties.) I was hoping POW would get into this, but not.
How 'bout "Tourists for Turbines," job 1 being for agri-tourists from Seattle and Portland to boycott any Horse Heaven area wineries not supporting the wind farm.
Oh, yeah, I like focusing on investors. Some of the actually rabid WSBE supporters I follow are the investor/analyst guys from down under with the Energy Insiders podcast and from Ireland and Germany with the Redefining Energy podcast. You shoulda heard them rip into Mark Zuckerberg & Meta/FB re "masculine energy."
The Oil & Gas Industry is also “subsidized to the max” as one commenter claims about renewable energy.
The US ran out of conventional fossil fuel reserves many decades ago, so we had to resort to "fracking", the most expensive means to extract natural resources in history.
“Fracking” devoured every dime of capital ever invested for over two decades, basically a ponsi scheme.
Break-even for a barrel of oil is $60 (down from over $80 largely due to the total substitution of US labor with low cost immigrant labor).
US foreign policy now mainly serves to create manufactured “crisis” around the world (ie. Iraq, Ukraine, Venezuela, and now Iran) to pump up the price of a barrel of oil above break-even.
So now we're spending a $Billion-Dollars-a-Day to keep up the facade, as we have for the better part of the last 25 years.
Fracked oil and gas simply can't complete in a free market, where the Arabs can still produce a barrel of conventional oil for $2 - $3 a barrel.
If you want to talk about an over-priced bunk technology that can't survive in the free market, it's US shale oil & gas.
PS There are some really good media creation/production people in the Freedom Over Fascism consortium like Gutsy Media and Fight Agency, Steve might want to talk with.
Anat and/or the folks at Way to Win can make introductions (I can make intros to both if helpful).
The biggest problem for renewables, when talking about gaining political traction and influence, is that it WILL NOT supply a continuing income stream to businesses, governments and lobbyists at each step of the infrastructure life cycle. Obvious example - If you install solar panels and a battery on a house it provides continuous and non-taxable savings to an individual - the house owner and is a one off cost for that individual. If you install any other method of power supply to the house the owner is then shackled to a utility company and provides a continuing income stream to that utility company and the ability for that company to send taxes to govt and cheques (oops, showing my age here, should say money) to whichever influence group the utility company likes, forever. The renewables industry is a ‘fit and forget’ service (comparatively) whereas fossil fuel has provided an unrelenting fire hose of income to be sprayed in whatever direction the asset holders see fit. Utilities concentrate money and therefore influence, renewables provide diffuse savings (not income) across many, many individuals.
So I think the political influence of the fossil fuel industry - which, let’s not forget is 4 -5 percent of global GDP and therefore the biggest individual economic activity in the world - is not about to be handed over to others. That being said, this revolution is not going to be stopped because the economics are simply undeniable and fossil fuel will slowly collapse while continuing to throw sand into the gears of the renewable industry as fossil fuel use declines. Can renewable take up be accelerated in the US - because it is rapidly becoming a US only problem ? Not really in the next couple of years because of one flashing orange sign blocking everything. Longer term? Undoubtedly: there are some very obvious steps to licensing, approvals, building codes and electricity grid which can reduce supply plus installation costs to about 80c (US) a watt as it is here in Australia. Can you guys change things? Yes, but slowly ATM.
It is incumbent upon the clean energy industry to incentivize the democratic party to be bold. Biden and the democrats accomplished all that was politically possible but the clean energy industries failed to even acknowledge that. They should have been telling the public non stop all the great things that legislation was going to allow them to provide them. Instead we got radio silence.
I tried to read the whole thing, mainly looking for some actual facts about wind and solar energy. I ended up scanning the last half of this. Still can’t find anything factual about this industry. It’s all about the marketing. The fact is neither of these industries can stand on there own without being subsidized to the max. As Warren Buffett has pointed out , If it weren’t for the subsidies no one would be building them. It’s true! After all these years they still can’t hold up on there own. This is not a messaging problem. It’s a “they just don’t work problem”
Interesting you say that, however I have been studying the economics and physics of both wind and solar energy for the past 2 years. I have learned from mentors with PHDs and lifetime experience in these subjects. I am not embarrassed at all.
1. Small, Cheap, Local Solar PV is down around $1 per Watt (if folks will keep it OFF THE ROOF). That works out to around 2 to 3 cents per kWh.
2. If you put that cheap Electricity into a Cheap, used EV, it works out about the same as 15 cent per Gallon Gasoline.
Those are real numbers, and without ANY subsidies.
Real bottom line is US does not need ANY subsidies for Solar PV. If BOTH the Rs and Ds would STOP trying to manipulate ANY of the Energy Markets, US would already much further down the path to mostly Solar PV + EVs.
Marketing babble is . . . marketing babble. Good discernment. At this point the Win for Solar PV and EVs (the big easy targets) are Fast, Good, and Cheap. Especially CHEAP. Thing that is blocking Cheap for US are the Punitive Tariffs (50% AGAINST Solar PV and 100% AGAINST Low-Cost, High-Quality EVs). Those are both Biden -- not Trump. Bottom line -- Coke and Pepsi (D v. R) are both CRAP. Neither, Please.
Trump (1st time) did not have 100% Tariffs AGAINST Low-Cost, High-Quality EVs. They were not even on the market during Trump (1st time). That part is 100% (100% rate, as well) Biden. And yes, Biden carried and INCREASE Anti-Solar PV Tariffs. See? This is why most US are sick of BOTH of you (D = R). In short, you BOTH Suck.
Biden implemented really important industrial strategy policies of a scope we haven't had in many decades.
Those policies include some amount of protection to allow domestic industries to get stood up that long-term would provide extremely cost-effective clean tech solutions.
If you were to listen to all of David's podcast episodes, you would know these things.
This specifically was discussed at length in the episode before this one.
That is comical. The "Some amount of protection," was political payola. For example (no, not a Tesla/Elon fanboi) -- since Tesla, largest EV operation in the world at the time -- was not on the D-Corporate Payola Plan -- was DIS-INVITED to the Biden Whitehouse for . . . EV Day!
The Blue, Ds, and even this operation are generally just political hackery, first, barely wrapped in used Green labels from others. It is almost worst than nothing. From nothing, US could choose to have something. With Blue/D parking in the lane, they help block everything.
As I said, if you had listened to the multiple episodes detailing the actual facts of Biden administration polices as implemented following the Manchin/Sinema hair cut, never mind the original proposals, you wouldn't be spouting such nonsense.
Dave's intro would make an excellent script that the solar, wind, storage, etc. industries should be blasting from the mountaintops 24/7 on all media and instead we have radio silence from the industry. The fossil fuel industry does this with lies all the time. They may be evil, but they are not stupid!
all through this, I am thinking, wait, are they talking about clean energy or the Democratic Party?
Really, the D(s) have become such a sleazy brand name -- they bring dis-credit to the Green Realm. Overall, Renewable, and Electrification would likely be better dis-associated from the D(s).
Who are you going to associate it with then? The party that is wholly owned by the fossil fuel industry. What planet are you living on?
Earth, you may want to visit sometime. Meanwhile -- PLEASE Neither D nor R represent Green. Most of US would rather not be associated with EITHER of you.
Example: I don't know where it came from, perhaps because I've been on the website of Renewable Energy and Wildlife Institute (REWI.org, great group no one hears about), but all of a sudden I get these online adds from Chevron with nice wildlife experts telling me how they really watch out for the antelope, etc. Inline in the NY Times, even while I'm at RenewEconomy.com.au. Then in audio as an add on some pod. Wow!
Man o' man, I could go on forever! Thank you Dave and Steve. I was interested to hear more about the 8500 influencers who are going to make "Signal" go viral. To me, it's great to get "information" about the worldwide dominance of WindSolarBatteriesElectrification (WSBE) to the legislators, staff, corp whoever, but it needs to get to the masses. Along with a bit of "lighten up on the enviro impacts" which the FF biz has used to demonize WSBE among those who should be its greatest proponents but who are easily swayed by "habitat, wildlife, views, extraction, toxics, safety, farmland, conserve, preserve..." And yeah, that Chinese spyware.
Not sure I think it's a great idea to focus first on "transmission." Here in CO I've been to the sites of four would-be solar 100ish MW farms, right next to ginormous transmission, even w/substations, which had permits denied by counties. Transmission was ready, but maybe now we need to extend it, overwork it, to go further afield to get the solar that NM & UT are building. Wanna play rough, how 'bout, "Boycott Steamboat, Boycott Telluride, Boycott Durango and Mesa Verde." (Really, Routt, San Miguel, La Plata and Montezuma Counties.) I was hoping POW would get into this, but not.
How 'bout "Tourists for Turbines," job 1 being for agri-tourists from Seattle and Portland to boycott any Horse Heaven area wineries not supporting the wind farm.
Oh, yeah, I like focusing on investors. Some of the actually rabid WSBE supporters I follow are the investor/analyst guys from down under with the Energy Insiders podcast and from Ireland and Germany with the Redefining Energy podcast. You shoulda heard them rip into Mark Zuckerberg & Meta/FB re "masculine energy."
Look at the cover story of this week’s Guardian
The Oil & Gas Industry is also “subsidized to the max” as one commenter claims about renewable energy.
The US ran out of conventional fossil fuel reserves many decades ago, so we had to resort to "fracking", the most expensive means to extract natural resources in history.
“Fracking” devoured every dime of capital ever invested for over two decades, basically a ponsi scheme.
Break-even for a barrel of oil is $60 (down from over $80 largely due to the total substitution of US labor with low cost immigrant labor).
US foreign policy now mainly serves to create manufactured “crisis” around the world (ie. Iraq, Ukraine, Venezuela, and now Iran) to pump up the price of a barrel of oil above break-even.
So now we're spending a $Billion-Dollars-a-Day to keep up the facade, as we have for the better part of the last 25 years.
Fracked oil and gas simply can't complete in a free market, where the Arabs can still produce a barrel of conventional oil for $2 - $3 a barrel.
If you want to talk about an over-priced bunk technology that can't survive in the free market, it's US shale oil & gas.
Dave have you been secretly listening to Anat Shenker-Osorio podcast appearances?
She's been harping on pretty much all of the things you talk about, e.g.;
'It's not the job of a message to say what is popular, it's the job of a message to make popular what needs to be said.'
'If you want to touch a nerve [with the thing you are talking about], you need to touch a nerve!!'
PS There are some really good media creation/production people in the Freedom Over Fascism consortium like Gutsy Media and Fight Agency, Steve might want to talk with.
Anat and/or the folks at Way to Win can make introductions (I can make intros to both if helpful).
Tesla first entered the market in 2012 and Trump first entered the whitehouse in 2016. You should be embarrassed at the depth of your ignorance.
The biggest problem for renewables, when talking about gaining political traction and influence, is that it WILL NOT supply a continuing income stream to businesses, governments and lobbyists at each step of the infrastructure life cycle. Obvious example - If you install solar panels and a battery on a house it provides continuous and non-taxable savings to an individual - the house owner and is a one off cost for that individual. If you install any other method of power supply to the house the owner is then shackled to a utility company and provides a continuing income stream to that utility company and the ability for that company to send taxes to govt and cheques (oops, showing my age here, should say money) to whichever influence group the utility company likes, forever. The renewables industry is a ‘fit and forget’ service (comparatively) whereas fossil fuel has provided an unrelenting fire hose of income to be sprayed in whatever direction the asset holders see fit. Utilities concentrate money and therefore influence, renewables provide diffuse savings (not income) across many, many individuals.
So I think the political influence of the fossil fuel industry - which, let’s not forget is 4 -5 percent of global GDP and therefore the biggest individual economic activity in the world - is not about to be handed over to others. That being said, this revolution is not going to be stopped because the economics are simply undeniable and fossil fuel will slowly collapse while continuing to throw sand into the gears of the renewable industry as fossil fuel use declines. Can renewable take up be accelerated in the US - because it is rapidly becoming a US only problem ? Not really in the next couple of years because of one flashing orange sign blocking everything. Longer term? Undoubtedly: there are some very obvious steps to licensing, approvals, building codes and electricity grid which can reduce supply plus installation costs to about 80c (US) a watt as it is here in Australia. Can you guys change things? Yes, but slowly ATM.
Every blue trifecta state can unilaterally wipe away most if not all of the annoyances that make it hard to install retail solutions.
They can also allocate many $Ms of public $ to install clean tech in/at public facilities.
And all of us can lobby our state & local electeds on the price, reliability and speed superiority of clean energy solutions.
"Blue" has caused more problems than it has cured.
Blue -- Increase Frack Gas and Frack Oil.
Blue -- Income Tax Credits that run up prices while doing nothing for low-income.
Blue -- Punitive Tariffs AGAINST low-cost, high-quality Silicon Solar PV
Blue -- Punitive Tariffs AGAINST low-cost, high-quality EVs.
Blue -- Enabled and Allowed NEC restrictions against Roof-Top Solar PV.
Not a Libertarian but they would do FAR MORE -- FOR Renewables than all the "Blue" combined.
It is incumbent upon the clean energy industry to incentivize the democratic party to be bold. Biden and the democrats accomplished all that was politically possible but the clean energy industries failed to even acknowledge that. They should have been telling the public non stop all the great things that legislation was going to allow them to provide them. Instead we got radio silence.
I tried to read the whole thing, mainly looking for some actual facts about wind and solar energy. I ended up scanning the last half of this. Still can’t find anything factual about this industry. It’s all about the marketing. The fact is neither of these industries can stand on there own without being subsidized to the max. As Warren Buffett has pointed out , If it weren’t for the subsidies no one would be building them. It’s true! After all these years they still can’t hold up on there own. This is not a messaging problem. It’s a “they just don’t work problem”
Your facts are obsolete. Try to inform yourself about the current economics before embarrassing yourself online.
Interesting you say that, however I have been studying the economics and physics of both wind and solar energy for the past 2 years. I have learned from mentors with PHDs and lifetime experience in these subjects. I am not embarrassed at all.
Here is what you may have missed?
1. Small, Cheap, Local Solar PV is down around $1 per Watt (if folks will keep it OFF THE ROOF). That works out to around 2 to 3 cents per kWh.
2. If you put that cheap Electricity into a Cheap, used EV, it works out about the same as 15 cent per Gallon Gasoline.
Those are real numbers, and without ANY subsidies.
Real bottom line is US does not need ANY subsidies for Solar PV. If BOTH the Rs and Ds would STOP trying to manipulate ANY of the Energy Markets, US would already much further down the path to mostly Solar PV + EVs.
Marketing babble is . . . marketing babble. Good discernment. At this point the Win for Solar PV and EVs (the big easy targets) are Fast, Good, and Cheap. Especially CHEAP. Thing that is blocking Cheap for US are the Punitive Tariffs (50% AGAINST Solar PV and 100% AGAINST Low-Cost, High-Quality EVs). Those are both Biden -- not Trump. Bottom line -- Coke and Pepsi (D v. R) are both CRAP. Neither, Please.
Biden extended Trump's solar tariffs he did not invent them Also, Trump 2 increased them. You are just pulling shit out your ass. Try to get real!
Trump (1st time) did not have 100% Tariffs AGAINST Low-Cost, High-Quality EVs. They were not even on the market during Trump (1st time). That part is 100% (100% rate, as well) Biden. And yes, Biden carried and INCREASE Anti-Solar PV Tariffs. See? This is why most US are sick of BOTH of you (D = R). In short, you BOTH Suck.
Biden implemented really important industrial strategy policies of a scope we haven't had in many decades.
Those policies include some amount of protection to allow domestic industries to get stood up that long-term would provide extremely cost-effective clean tech solutions.
If you were to listen to all of David's podcast episodes, you would know these things.
This specifically was discussed at length in the episode before this one.
That is comical. The "Some amount of protection," was political payola. For example (no, not a Tesla/Elon fanboi) -- since Tesla, largest EV operation in the world at the time -- was not on the D-Corporate Payola Plan -- was DIS-INVITED to the Biden Whitehouse for . . . EV Day!
The Blue, Ds, and even this operation are generally just political hackery, first, barely wrapped in used Green labels from others. It is almost worst than nothing. From nothing, US could choose to have something. With Blue/D parking in the lane, they help block everything.
As I said, if you had listened to the multiple episodes detailing the actual facts of Biden administration polices as implemented following the Manchin/Sinema hair cut, never mind the original proposals, you wouldn't be spouting such nonsense.