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

Court orders restart of all US offshore wind power construction

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 446 posts

Re: Court orders restart of all US offshore wind power construction

#231

Post by cm2187 »

hvb2 wrote: post #197
themafia wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a country changes course every four years Dozens of new GW+ wind farms came online in the last four years. This concerns a few projects in a few particular locations that are exposed to federal interference. It has impacts on the market but the market is larger than these minor disturbances by an order of magnitude. > while keeping the focus on long-term ideas and plans. We have private business in this country.…

> Dozens of new GW+ wind farms came online in the last four years. Thats not that much is it given the size and energy demand of the country? And that's over the past 4 years, you'll only see the true impact of this in the next 6 years. > This concerns a few projects in a few particular locations that are exposed to federal interference Markets are driven by a lot of feelings too. If you're trying to build a wind far…

Electricity doesn't travel continents the way shipping containers do. So it's not like anyone wants to build a wind farm and wonders where in the world they are going to place it. Plus if you are a major single customer (eg datacenter, factory), you need reliable energy, so would be odd to build a wind farm. As far as I am aware wind farms only makes sense when you sell to the grid, and where there is an alternative on demand source of energy to take over the weeks there is no wind.

Re: Court orders restart of all US offshore wind power construction

#232

Post by joe_mamba »

johanvts wrote: post #230
pwarner wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not advocating their system, but here's one pro for China obviously.

You can have a functional democracy and still do long term planning, the problem is the current US government. Its not a fundamental flaw in democracy.

>You can have a functional democracy and still do long term planning

Sure, but that's contingent on

1) the voters being well educated and not easily brainwashed by various types of propaganda pushing them to vote against their own interests (see the Germans being anti-nuclear and pro-Russian gas since the 80s) and >

2) the voters being trusted and having an actual ownership in the country so that their votes affect them directly and also having a say in how their country is run, because if whoever gets voted into power just does the opposite of what the voters want "for their own good", then you're not a democracy anymore, you're just a well functioning state (if that).

Other than Switzerland, and maybe Denmark, I don't know any democracies that constantly function well and aren't plagued with issues.

Re: Court orders restart of all US offshore wind power construction

#233

Post by hvb2 »

themafia wrote: post #222
hvb2 wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dozens of new GW+ wind farms came online in the last four years. Thats not that much is it given the size and energy demand of the country? And that's over the past 4 years, you'll only see the true impact of this in the next 6 years. > This concerns a few projects in a few particular locations that are exposed to federal interference Markets are driven by a lot of feelings too. If you're trying to build a wind far…

> Thats not that much is it given the size and energy demand of the country? What is it relative to these 5 projects? > you'll only see the true impact of this in the next 6 years. Are these the _only_ new projects that could _possibly_ be built in that time frame? > a lot of feelings too The feelings of those with money not of the general population. > If you're trying to build a wind farm now, why on earth would yo…

> Are these the _only_ new projects that could _possibly_ be built in that time frame?

No, but a lot of the coastal waters are federal land (water? :D) which is why this is a problem to begin with. Wind at sea has a lot of benefits, no neighbors, nothing to interfere with the wind, typically very predictable power generation. So yes, you can build a lot on land, the US has plenty of space for that but that'll be subject to a LOT more pushback from the general public.

> The feelings of those with money not of the general population

And those with money are the ones making the investment decisions, no?

> You just said. "The size and energy demand of the country." Or are you proposing that no one would build unless we remove absolutely all risk for them? I'm not sure you and I mean the same thing when saying "private business."

You've followed all the rules, got all the permits, you're building and have invested x amount. And NOW the rug is pulled from underneath you? That's not a very comforting world to be investing in.

Or to put it in more general public sense. You want to build a house in city X. You get a plot of land, get an architect to draw up what you'll build, you get all the permits and are halfway through construction and THEN the city revokes your permit. You tell me, but I wouldn't try building anything there again because they are just unreliable. You go to the city next door.

> I believe this is a worn out trope. Please show some evidence this has actually occurred.

Happy to, compare these 2 charts.

USA: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/energy-st...

Europe: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/energy-st...

The US is basically just switching to gas power. And if you look at % of energy mix you'll see that wind is mostly flat as a % of the whole electricty generation. So yes, much much more money/investment is going into renewables in Europe. And as unpredictable as policy can be there too, they typically have the understanding to only change rules for NEW projects not existing ones.

> Ah.. the "amazonification" of America. "Businesses shouldn't compete or take risks!" You seem to say. We must bend over and make them happy before they can deign to take our dollars. Perfectly modern and utterly ridiculous.

Businesses should take risks and be rewarded for them. But take the building a house example above, would you agree that in general rules shouldn't be changed during the game/on existing projects?

Re: Court orders restart of all US offshore wind power construction

#234

Post by clarionbell »

pwarner wrote: post #146
igorramazanov wrote: post #136

If a country changes course every four years, how can the success of a long-term project be ensured? And what of its negotiating credibility? How can the other side trust that an agreement will hold in the future? This is not a critique, but a genuine curiosity, because there's an obvious drawback with a system with opposing world views. Unless, of course, something still unites them in the first place, with acceptab…

I'm not advocating their system, but here's one pro for China obviously.

The disadvantage in their system, is if the the leadership makes a wrong decision, it will stick for much longer than 4 years, and it won't be challenged.

Now, recently, they had a very good run. This must be admitted and even celebrated.

But the aforementioned flaw is still very much present.

Re: Court orders restart of all US offshore wind power construction

#235

Post by hyperman1 »

Krasnol wrote: post #178
vvpan wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is largely why presidencies do not mess with the order they inherit too much (subjective statement I know). Most institutions and projects are not stressed and the government branches just keep doing what they always did. The current administration is an outlier, but we all know that.

The problem is that the outlier might mark a beginning. Seeing what's possible in this position, I doubt future US presidents will hold back.

Indeed, the post-Trump period will have a choice to make. Either they continue the chosen path and dont regain trust no matter the next president, or congress and court add some serious limitations to the presidential powers so future dems and reps will never go Trump again.

I wonder if both parties see the need for that at this point. There still seems a lot of 'but we are the good guys' in both partys blocking deep reform. If I'm honest, it took 2 world wars to partially whack that attitude out of Europe, and it's slowly coming back.

Re: Court orders restart of all US offshore wind power construction

#236

Post by piker »

Krasnol wrote: post #178
vvpan wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is largely why presidencies do not mess with the order they inherit too much (subjective statement I know). Most institutions and projects are not stressed and the government branches just keep doing what they always did. The current administration is an outlier, but we all know that.

The problem is that the outlier might mark a beginning. Seeing what's possible in this position, I doubt future US presidents will hold back.

There is a historical tide rolling in and out of presidential power. We’re currently in a high-power executive moment that began with the AUMF for Bush 2. The courts and Congress can act to curtail that authority somewhat and hopefully will. But a lot of the EO activity is ultimately just performative unconstitutional action that will be reversed, damaging as that process may be.

Re: Court orders restart of all US offshore wind power construction

#237

Post by graemep »

vvpan wrote: post #162
igorramazanov wrote: post #136

If a country changes course every four years, how can the success of a long-term project be ensured? And what of its negotiating credibility? How can the other side trust that an agreement will hold in the future? This is not a critique, but a genuine curiosity, because there's an obvious drawback with a system with opposing world views. Unless, of course, something still unites them in the first place, with acceptab…

Which is largely why presidencies do not mess with the order they inherit too much (subjective statement I know). Most institutions and projects are not stressed and the government branches just keep doing what they always did. The current administration is an outlier, but we all know that.

That could be a problem in itself. It certainly is here in the UK.

If you have two parties that have much the same policies you do not get necessary change and voting becomes meaningless.

Re: Court orders restart of all US offshore wind power construction

#238

Post by bojan »

aboardRat4 wrote: post #204
monting wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They "eliminated" extreme poverty caused by communist control in the first place, by going to a capitalist system. There were tons of economic low-hanging fruits by building out large infrastructure projects, which corruption happily siphoned off of. The ROI of these infra projects have been gone for a while, yet they continued. Also it's been stealing intellectual property, trade dumping, exporting deflation. Soakin…

Emm... and what prevents the USA from doing all the same things?

Labour laws, for starters.

The conditions the average Chinese works in are abysmal, even from the American point of view.

Re: Court orders restart of all US offshore wind power construction

#239

Post by solatic »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #173
shimman wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, this is the core of a particular brand of politics: neoliberal politics. Where the financialization of everything is what's most important. There was a time, still in lived memory, where the US government was able to complete many types of projects and it also coincided with the period of lowest economic inequality (the great compression), the expansion of civil rights, and had the highest taxes against the elite…

Tax rates are not the same as effective taxes paid, and US taxes as a percent of GDP are at an all time high. This is besides the fact that gdp is many times higher, growing geometrically. It is an interesting question of what changed in terms of ability to execute, but lack of funding isn't the answer. I suspect it is a combination of scope creep, application to intractable problems, and baumols cost disease at work…

> Tax rates are not the same as effective taxes paid

Correct, but the tax system is nonetheless quite effective at setting behavioral incentives and disincentives. Higher income and estate tax rates incentivize capital being locked up in investments instead (for lower capital gains taxes); those investments put people to work and are subject to Labor negotiating higher compensation. Allowing donations to non-profits to deduct from other taxes allows private individuals (compared to a government bureaucracy) to more efficiently fund social welfare programs, which incidentally, also put people to work in the administration of such programs.

Funding government is not the sole goal of higher taxation rates, but rather, also how incentives in society are shaped.

Re: Court orders restart of all US offshore wind power construction

#240

Post by watwut »

aboardRat4 wrote: post #211
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I follow the questions. The success of a long-term project can be ensured through the procedures described in the source article: you set up a durable judicial system, and invest them with the power to require that the country uphold its end of the bargain, no matter how much its current political leaders might want to change course.

>success of a long-term project can be ensured through the procedures described in the source article: you set up a durable judicial system, and invest them with the power to require that the country uphold its end of the bargain, no matter how much its current political leaders might want to change course. That's an abuse of the judicial system. Politicians are elected exactly because the voters perceive a need to c…

That is not an abuse of the judicial system. That is actual rule of law rather the rule of the whim.

Elected politicians can change laws and rules going forward, but there should be obstacles at changing past laws.

Post reply on HN