Clean energy jobs outnumber fossil fuel jobs in most US states

From all I've read, those kinds of alternatives you mentioned are either pipedreams or far too expensive to be practical.

And switching to nuclear isn't "impossible", it's just damned expensive to set up. As I think has been mentioned, actual nuclear production is really cheap - building the facilities is ungodly expensive, and they have risks that wind turbines and such just don't have.

 

More often than not, when you see the term "tax expenditures", you're about to be asked to believe that the depreciation of an asset is somehow a subsidy when it comes to unfavored energy sources and considered part of a normal tax calculation in other areas. Honesty evades many.

 

You're changing the scenario, but the change only further illustrates the point. Yes, when mechanized farms were a new thing, the startup costs were more expensive - but even when they were new they paid for themselves pretty easily. Just on that alone, it's an easy decision. But then there are more benefits - your country has the production capability (so isn't having foreign companies profit off your late entry), those workers laid off early because they were no longer needed are able to transition to new areas of employment sooner (meaning your nation's economy produces far more because your farms are more efficient, and the old labor moves on to other productive ventures, whereas countries sticking to hand tools are still ineffiicient and their labor doesn't go on to more efficient/productive ventures

 

Are you going to pretend that Donald Trump is not making moves to make it harder for sustainable energy to build on its foothold.

I don't quite agree.

Big oil didn't invest in Trump, that's certainly true. And they do see him as a "winbag".

However, they have their man in the EPA now, and they'll take advantage of any opportunity politics presents to put off the inevitable.

This has always been the challenge of the oil business, going all the way back to the time when Rockefeller, the "oil lamp magnate", waged campaigns to convince people that electricity was dangerous. (meanwhile Rockefeller was investing heavily in coal, the primary fuel of the new electric power industry).

 

You really need to go back and look what you said. You exactly said, "Meanwhile renewable energy gets 7.3billion in subsidies annually, and has no special tax on green energy. It's just disingenuous to suggest oil subsidies are in reality comparable to green subsidies."

Taxing wind output and having surcharges on grid tied solar are special taxes on green energy.

 

Don't build nuclear power plants in tidal wave zones would be a start of a regulation that could have prevented that $190B mistake.

Challenging your ignorance is not a strawman. I know someone who worked as a contractor in a nuclear power plant who can no longer work around nuclear power because after less than a year just handling the materials and equipment from the plant caused his and several of his co-workers' little badges to get them all banned, having met their lifetime exposure thresholds. There was no accident. It was chronic exposure to very low level contamination.

What regulations do you deem "excessive" on nuclear energy specifically?

 

Considering that I worked on this for several years, I'm sure I know a lot more about it than what you've read.

Do the math. It will never happen, We could never build that many power plants.

And expensive is right! It would be cheaper to paint the SW with solar panels.

 

Or build the wall ten feel taller [they knew the history and how tall waves can get!

Or put the generators in a water-tight room above sea level.

But no, they put the EMERGENCY generators below sea level in a room that was not protected.

No amount of regulations can prevent stupidity. Budget cuts will win every time!

 

The pipeline was never intended to get the USA energy independence. We ship oil/gas as exports because we sell, like everyone else, to the highest bidder.
We've been a net exporter for several years.
If we wanted energy independence, we'd keep what we pump and refine, right here. We don't.

 

Data doesn't always back perception.

 

You said no one ever provided the data. That's the data. If you can't read a simple report that's not my problem. It does explain why you are so confused.

 

Huge flaw in the Sierra Club article - the data just says "clean energy jobs", it does not describe what a "clean energy job" is. It breaks down the fossil fuel jobs to another level (such as coal, natural gas, refining, etc) but its not very specific.

Given its the Sierra Club, I'm very suspicious.

 

The pipeline is intended to get oil to the gulf for exporting! This has nothing to do with energy independence.

 

It cites the source, the DOE, and links the data. How much more information do you need?
https://www.docdroid.net/IsQK539/sierra-club-clean-energy-jobs-report-2017-final.xlsx.html

 

I looked at the Sierra Club article (link in OP post #1), and then read the links in the Sierra Club article including your link. Nowhere are "clean energy jobs" defined or described (or fossil fuel related jobs).

Try again.

 

I di

that is kind of funny.

I didn't click the link, never heard of docdroid so I don't trust it. and although i'm sure its going to be labeled biased for saying this but I find anything the sierra club says to mostly likely be slanted to the max.

Besides the obvious fact, common sense tells me that the numbers are BS.

 

Your suspicions of bias are well founded. The last slide in the supposedly DOE "objective data" is labeled "Clean Energy vs. Dirty Fuel Jobs".

 

I am fond of the design of the reactors that put water tanks on top so that pretty much no matter what they can get some water down onto the core as long as the tower is standing. I think it is a pre-fab french design but I forget for certain. Been a lot of moons since I read about them. Apparently China is planning on building several with that design whose ever it is.

 

There are failsafes on modern reactors that weren't present at Fukushima - again, it was built 50 years ago.

that's cute.

Look, I wouldn't expect you to know this, but you shouldn't make such assumptions. I said, "I've heard experts in the industry say that..." FYI, I don't "know someone" who worked in the field, I know dozens of people. I was at NNPTC in SC, the Navy's "Naval Nuclear Power Training Command". Every person I trained under was a nuclear engineer. One of my best friends from deployment was a nuclear engineer on the ship, and is married to a nuclear engineer. I was on the USS Ronald Reagan CVN76, which provided humanitarian relief to the Japanese people for months in Operation Tomodachi. We went close to the coast, and we were exposed to high levels of radiation. I was personally measured at abnormally high rad levels, after being part of the initial cleanup crew, as we disposed of many materials that received obscene levels of radiation. Doctors have told me some of my service-connected disabilities are likely related to radiation. Close friends, who worked with me in the same department doing the same job, have had major health complications related to it and are part of (last I heard) ongoing major class action suits. "Challenging [my] ignorance"?

As I said, "I've heard experts in the industry say that...". I wasn't speaking of the regulations on my own, but by proxy from the many nuclear engineers I know. And, as I said, maybe you missed it, but nuclear energy is still technically a state secret. I mean, haven't you heard of countries around the world still trying to do nuclear research we've already done? As I said, the regulations are passed by politicians and bureaucrats - it isn't hard to imagine that they reflect more than what is necessary. That happens all the time in many open sectors.

Ok, fair. I misspoke there - there are some, but the taxes and subsidies between the two industries just aren't comparable. Green gets more subsidies than oil, oil gets far more taxes than green. My point stands.

 

That sounds good. However, to cool the decay heat of a 500 MW reactor, the amount of water needed is staggering. For 1 day cooling for the Fukushima reactors, for example, you'd need a olympic size swimming pool of water. Since the decay heat is significant for days after SCRAM, you'd need probably 10 of those swimming pools to be on the safe side until power can be restored.

Now, that's going to add a pretty penny to operating costs, which is why it is not done, although it would be the safe thing to do. Passive cooling is an absolute necessity.

 

My curiosity to know what kind of shenanigans they are playing to craft the lie narrative whopper in the OP is currently outweighed by my laziness. If they had stuck to a believable lie instead of a massive whopper, they'd do lots better in the narrative wars on this issue.

Someone else posted what these kinds of narratives are really about, creating more graft troughs for Complex minions to feed off of. Regardless of whether the PSA is domestic abuse or green energy, it's really about creating exploitable pools of money. That people don't realize this and continue to be fooled that it's "all about the cause du jour" is discouraging.

 

Sure, sure. Just look at the direct expenditures of wind and solar and tell me it's not more expensive than any other source of energy. Then take a look at the DOE guaranteed loan program. What do you know; wind and solar are one of the few on the list.

 

I think it is more seen as a stop gap in in the event of critical emergency system to buy enough time to either get more water flowing or to run like hell in the event of pump failures, whichever the case may be as opposed to be a perpetual solution.

 

So you verified everything I said that you dismissed as strawmen, Interesting tactic. Nuclear energy is not green energy. The regulation exist for a reason. "Excessive regulation" is like saying "taxes are too high" in its meaninglessness. These regulations exist for a reason. By and large the military is not subject to the same regulations as civilian power, so speaking of strawmen.....

 

And here is the recipe to keep it that way; http://thesolutionsproject.org/