Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 933 posts

Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects

#101

Post by i5heu »

jeltz wrote: post #51
saagarjha wrote: post #4

> Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in a statement posted on X that Americans deserve an energy system built on common sense and not one dependent on "costly subsidies". I agree. This is why we are building offshore wind and not subsidizing fossil fuels, right?

All kinds of power generation are typically heavily subdized in some way. I do not think this "common sense" strategy exists.

"common sense" is common sense because it is not "specialised sense" or "expert sense"

So if politicians base their decisions on "common sense", they confess to not being able to use experts that refine their knowledge and position about a topic.

A "common sense" strategy is therefore what is most popular and on the basis of the understanding of laymen without deeper understanding or knowledge.

Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects

#102

Post by Y-bar »

spwa4 wrote: post #46
chewbacha wrote: post #18

Parts of the world are literally on fire but the US is redirecting money to halt renewables and towards gas. The demand for energy is higher than ever due to AI data centers, but I guess the next model is more important than a habitable environment.

[flagged]

When you say that the Greens provide subsidies to coal, but this can be found on a quick search…

> The next fight is already brewing, over a Green push to accelerate the phase-out of coal-fired power generation in eastern Germany. In a draft resolution, seen by POLITICO, the party wants to bring the coal exit forward from 2038 to 2030, as is already the case for mining regions in the west of the country.

https://www.politico.eu/article/german-government-coalition-...

… Are you sure you are talking about the Greens and not CDU or CSU which they occasionality form government coalitions with?

Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects

#103

Post by TeMPOraL »

_joel wrote: post #22
juntoalaluna wrote: post #12

Insane. Over the last year, wind - mostly offshore - has generated more than 35% of electricity here. Gas is down to 27%. It's really, really good. And it looks cool.

Not great for the wildlife during drilling but it's better than the carbon rich alternatives.

Nothing is great for wildlife, including leaving it alone and undisturbed, because nature doesn't care if animals are happy, or even if they exist.

Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects

#104

Post by newswasboring »

So in short a company was servicing power demand in a low pollution way. Then American government gave them money so they can instead service the same demand while causing more pollution.

Just... Why? To protect a few hundred jobs in America? They could have just given a small portion of that money to these workers and they would stop complaining about job loss. 1.2 Billion is a big number.

Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects

#105

Post by wiether »

mark_something wrote: post #59
robbiep wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had to check that, It is 129 million

Indeed: https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-announces-energy-...

Putting aside the sycophantic wording around the orange leader and the total lack of details of how it's going to achieve what they are promising and what is actually going to happen, it's funny to see the distinction between gov officials and the Duke exec:

  Gov: valued at $129 million and reinvest that same amount in additional generating capacity


  Duke: will reinvest nearly $129 million in additional generating capacity, which may include

Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects

#106

Post by metalman »

my guess is that this project will be quickly relocated somewhere else in a double loose for the US, but then may very well prove to illegal in any number of violations of US law, triggering further confusion and unplanned costs for US tax payers. it's a triumphalist celebration of anti logic

Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects

#107

Post by antsar »

KronisLV wrote: post #57
kingleopold wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That number directly correlates with life quality in almost every country on earth. More energy per capita means higher life quality, without a doubt in every high quality place.

What about quality of life per watt and just making having a certain standard of living more energy efficient? Simple examples: energy efficient lights seem to have no downsides, better insulation helps my apartment building retain heat, more efficient electronics mean that my homelab servers pull like 100 W total and public transport probably removes a bunch of cars from the road and increases air quality and decrea…

> energy efficient lights seem to have no downsides

Efficiency is good, but this isn't true. Decades into LED-ification we still suffer shit-tier PWM strobing, poor dimming, disruption to wildlife and human life, and streetlights turning purple en masse.

(The last two are installation and quality issues, but when driven by lowest-bidder compliance with simplistic "efficiency" mandates that's what you get).

Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects

#109

Post by ffsm8 »

fsh wrote: post #87
spwa4 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This is blatantly untrue: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/Fig2_Gro...

What was untrue specifically? I'm not sure what quoting the electricity by general source over the last decades disproves.

Did you read something into spwas comment he didn't actually say?

Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects

#110

Post by master-lincoln »

eastbound wrote: post #67
jeltz wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All kinds of power generation are typically heavily subdized in some way. I do not think this "common sense" strategy exists.

That’s a perverse incentive against ecology, case in point. Hear me out. We take citizen’s money to subsidize energy so they can get their energy for cheaper (at marginal level - while still paying the subsidy’s taxes) so they can undertake industrial/residential projects that we wouldn’t do with less energy. In a word, we incentive people to consume more (in a consumerist sense), which is bad for ecology, because we…

won't happen with capitalism which has an emphasis on economic growth forever...
Post reply on HN