Quote:
Originally Posted by Cube Inmate
I recognize your passion for this issue. I can be equally ardent when I see an issue clearly, yet "others" refuse to agree with me. But by putting forth an argument in this manner you are widening the gap. To say "no matter what the damage to the economy" is extreme, and opens you up to being attacked as a one-sided zealot. Economy, production, standard of living...it matters A LOT, and you'll have to face the fact that your "simple truth" is not the least bit simple at all. There is a balancing act to be done, and unfortunately some people are urged to go to the opposite extreme in order to balance extreme statements like yours above.
I do not deny that there is profit to be made in "green energy." But it needs to be pointed out that "profit" in this case refers only to wealth re-distribution, not wealth creation. Energy is the "lever" we use to take basic human productivity (wealth creation) and make it industrial (MORE wealth creation). Hydrocarbons are a dense source of energy, and relatively cheap to obtain. The difference between the energy needed to extract the oil and the energy we can obtain from the oil is available to magnify our productive efforts and actually produce wealth.
"Green" energy does the same thing, as long as it costs less to harvest than it provides. But if the difference between production energy and usable energy is less favourable than for hydrocarbons, then the choice to pursue these sources will be negative in terms of wealth. Sure...some people will profit, but humanity as a whole will produce less.
That is...util the "green" energy balance legitimately exceeds that of oil...without the artificial impacts of subsidies, carbon taxes, etc.
|
I get that argument far more than you know. I have struggled with the balance between moderation and extremeism on this issue. I have posted many moderate calls to action.
No one listens. Same lies from O&G, same apathy from people who need to see a problem to believe it exists.
I lived moderism on this issue. So have mant others who know the problem better and can do more.
As I mentioned this problem was brought up 45 years ago. There was a general public desire to do something about it 25 years ago. The reason action has been so slow is greed and protectionism, pure and simple.
Meanwhile, 8 of the hottest years on record were in the last 10.
Tired of being moderate. Moderation got us nowhere. And loudness seems to win the day in this age. I wonder if there is a good fight anymore.
If I'm going to be proven right, which there is no scientific doubt that I will be, I'm gonna go out with my arms flailing, my middle fingers raised, chanting 'I told you so' the whole way.
Moderation has not worked.