This is beyond my understanding. They are actually paying to stop society from advancing.
Welcome to American conservatism.
US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects
381–390 of 954 posts
Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects
#382I read up recently on the history of the fall of the roman empire and it was fascinating how eerily similar it was to the current state of the US. Overwhelmed by corruption and wars they make stupider and stupider decisions on ever larger scales, ever more frequently. And the population grows ever more cynical, eventually opting for authoritarianism before eventually the center can't hold any more and it all collapse…
Older generation has lead poisoning from all the leaded gasoline burned
I hate this theory. It is extremely condescending, offers nothing, has no proof, but sounds plausible enough that many people believe it.
It is much more likely that our economic system rewards hostile behavior and that money has outsized influence in politics and a criminal justice system which lets rich people get away with crimes. That money correlates more with hostile behavior then lead, Instead of blaming lead, blame capitalism.
Just think about all the people who put lead in the gasoline in the first place, did they go to prison for their crimes, or did they make a bunch of money and retire in luxury.
Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects
#383Earlier quoted context omitted.
"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.
For at least a few years, "common sense" has been hijacked by populist politicians, now it just means whatever simplistic idea that fits their worldview, even when it's not complicated to see that said idea is clearly misguided. The original meaning seems lost to me.
That was the original meaning dating back at least to thomas paine (bless his heart). It is a term impossible to deploy in good faith.
Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects
#384Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, we're not expecting someone else to stop it. We voted for this. The evil is not imposed on us. It is us. Not everyone, but a majority. The minority is looking for ways to stop it, but it requires getting literally everyone else to work together. Which means any disagreement among them results in a loss, and more of the same evil.
Less than half of people who voted voted for Trump, and turnout was 64%. Being allowed to chose between two evils every few years isn't democracy.
That's been the system for over 200 years and Americans have never changed it, even though it only exists as it does to keep slaveowning states in the union and prevent a civil war (which it failed to do.)
If it isn't democracy now, it's never been democracy.
Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects
#385Man - What exactly are these people?
Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects
#386I read up recently on the history of the fall of the roman empire and it was fascinating how eerily similar it was to the current state of the US. Overwhelmed by corruption and wars they make stupider and stupider decisions on ever larger scales, ever more frequently. And the population grows ever more cynical, eventually opting for authoritarianism before eventually the center can't hold any more and it all collapse…
Never attribute to stupidity what can be attributed to self-interest. It sure looks stupid when you look at America or the Roman Empire as a whole. But when you look at the specific individuals doing these "stupid" things, and the individuals enabling them, it is perfectly aligned with their own best interests.
and your point?
Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects
#387Earlier quoted context omitted.
But... you're commenting on an article in which we are stopping the "we are building" part?
Who is "we" here? This is about one company bending the knee, not an entire industry or population.
"We" is referring to the US federal government, elected by the US population, and which has (and is using) massive levers to kneecap development of renewable energy sources.
Some internet commentators may wish to unhelpfully point out that no matter the US federal efforts, renewable development will always be above literal zero, and so "we haven't stopped." But it's not a very useful contribution to the conversation.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/stalled-us-permits-...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-08-26/us-renewa...
There are dozens of similar articles about dozens of different projects and mechanisms used to stall those projects. Yes, I concede the level will almost certainly remain above zero and so "we haven't stopped." Good-faith adults know what the conversation is about and can either engage in it or opt out of it instead of resorting to excessive pedantry.
Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects
#388Insane. 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.
[deleted]
Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects
#389Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is misleading, because China has no gas, and they use coal power as dispatchable source with lower capacity factor (similar to gas elsewhere). Coal+gas electricity is basically the same fraction in China than in the US. But countries like Germany or Spain are significantly ahead in this regard, with much higher fraction of electrical energy coming from solar/wind. See: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electric…
Burning natural gas instead of coal should result in about half as much carbon emissions theoretically, although methane leaks will narrow the advantage.
Absolutely. Gas is a lot less problematic than coal.
But my point is that it fills (in China) a very similar role for the electric grid and countries don't get to choose what fossils are in their soil.
The US using relatively more gas than coal is not any kind of laudable achievement, it's simply whats cheaply available.
Norway does not get any credit in my book for being full renewable either (because they have "free" hydro power literally everywhere).
Re: US strikes $1.2B deal to pay German firm to halt offshore wind projects
#390> 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?
> not one dependent on "costly subsidies". While paying out 1.2 billion dollars.
Oh that's not nearly the amount of fossil subsidies. Some say it's
$31b/yr direct. If you factor in indirect costs like climate damage, health expenses, oil wars, etc, it's much higher. Renewables are much, much cheaper regardless of a little incentive, if there are any left.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/sep/09/fossil-f...