Post by BOGC on Sept 4, 2024 0:03:02 GMT -5
Sept 3, 2024 22:10:30 GMT -5 Overton Window said:
There are a couple of people on the Right here who actually have ideas that are more complex than just a bumper sticker, so I'd like to know if there is any overlap with the Left that has been put on the back burner because fighting is what we do now or something. (When I say Right and Left, I don't mean third-world stuff that has never happened in the U.S. and hopefully never will).
Renewables even beyond energy make sense, when the technology and new processes are ready. They're not broadly ready yet, and it may be 20 years for some and longer than that for others before they're suitable for nearly all use cases; perhaps never for some. Electric aircraft might be better for flying taxis (quieter, no exhaust concentration in densely used areas), but they'll probably never match a jet for higher speeds and longer distances; although if biofuel manufacturing were scalable and really carbon neutral, that could be a drop-in substitute for jets. I gather the Navy is looking at processes that can use seawater including dissolved CO2 and nuclear energy to create synthetic hydrocarbons; eventually that could be great for carriers, which then wouldn't need to be resupplied with aviation fuel. Probably not worth spending a huge amount on now, but the research to turn in from principles into practical may make sense, even if not full speed ahead.
I'm getting a Cybertruck, NOT to save the planet, but because an EV should be lower maintenance and last longer (and by the time it needs battery replacement, the batteries should be larger capacity, faster charging, etc); and with a body mostly stainless steel and aluminum castings, it won't rust. And by the time my ability to drive myself declines, the self-driving should more nearly be the real thing, just with over-the-air software updates. But I wouldn't if I lived in Alaska (with few chargers and a supercharger location only in I think Anchorage) or probably northern Canada either; or doing a lot of travel in the boonies where superchargers are not yet close enough together. But I have zero desire to drive to Alaska or in the extreme boonies, so that's fine for me.
With current batteries, EVs won't work well in extreme cold or extreme heat (Phoenix is doable, but probably not where they do their best). But in 15 years or so there should be graphene batteries that are safer, larger capacity, nearly as fast charging as filling a gas tank, and probably better in extreme environments, which could be suitable for the vast majority of uses.
And EVs aren't really green unless at least the grid is. Wind and solar are not continuous, meaning they need some sort of power storage too, etc, whether that's massive batteries or something like Vianden (Luxembourg) Pumped Storage Plant, which fills an artificial lake atop a small mountain during off-peak, and lets the water down to drive generators via turbines during peak load (saw it myself, back in the 70's, complete with a look at both the lake and the turbine area). Advanced reactor designs (pebble bed for example, which is failsafe, scalable, and has minimal issues with transport and storage of used fuel) probably make sense, notwithstanding NIMBY. And eventually we'll solve controlled fusion, though it might be another 20 years.
So...supporting renewables tech development and scaling is good (the part I'd mostly agree with lefties on, if not in every detail), but mandates are BAD. Mandates will damage the economy and hurt people, and new tech, manufacturing, infrastructure and the ability for businesses and people to buy the new tech (at a competitive cost, not just lifecycle but up front too) will all be harmed by mandates.
Extend the concept to other things. Ensured private retirement plans subject to reasonable regulatory standards should eventually replace totally government run programs like Social Security, which is all too tempting to politicians to overextend beyond actuarial soundness. Medical savings accounts plus catastrophic coverage is cheaper and mostly better than regular health insurance, esp. if the problem of transparency among care providers (apples and oranges comparing a top specialist that has a lower success rate because they take the most difficult cases vs someone that doesn't) can be solved, and information taking that into account made widely available, so people can choose for the balance of top care vs top value they need. School choice is just plain obvious, if you're not beholden to the teacher unions.
Crime? Hold parents accountable, dump social engineering out of schools in favor of restoring discipline and academics that expect results, and enforce the law vigorously and impartially. All the slanted handing of both schools and prosecution/courts simply encourages the attitudes that promote crime.
Simple. And if more of the left was more reasonable, they'd be willing to at least try some of those things. But they get their money from unions and their votes from shady methods like ballot harvesting from old folks homes and during COVID, mail-in ballot procedures not in compliance with state law, so for many, the last thing they're interested in is results.