Submitted by Sorin61 t3_113v9ty in technology
CatalyticDragon t1_j8uicqd wrote
Reply to comment by ThePrince14 in Majority of Texans back shift to solar energy by Sorin61
Doesn't mean lawmakers there aren't constantly attacking renewables and trying to stymie adoption.
ThePrince14 t1_j8ukiyt wrote
Did you read the articles you posted? Or just quickly google and paste headlines to match your narrative.
First article was super super weak. Just basically said that some people blamed renewables for the Texas power outage issues. Big whoop, politicians always trying to capitalize on public issues to score points by spouting BS. Happens all the time on both sides and Reddit eats it up.
Second article has a paywall, so doubt you even read it…
Third article just says that some utilities companies don’t want to compete with power being put back on the grid, so they’re trying to put tariffs in place. This one is sort of relevant to your argument, but again pretty weak.
At the end of the day, the actual numbers are what matters. Texas generates more renewable energy than any other state and Texas invests a hell of a lot of money into renewables (more renewable projects than any other state in 2021). You can’t argue with data, and you certainly can’t argue with hard data with pretty weak qualitative articles that aren’t much more than a couple of small cases that are turned into clickbait.
If you want to counter this argument with ANY data showing that Texas is reducing investment in any way or anything even close to that, I’m happy to listen, but I’m just tired of the same BS circlejerk on Reddit and no one actually wants to educate themselves, they’re just happy punching down to make themselves feel superior.
CatalyticDragon t1_j8uymsh wrote
> basically said that some people blamed renewables for the Texas power outage issues
"Some people" here being elected officials, including the state's governor, which I think is quite an important distinction.
> Second article has a paywall
That's what 12ft ladder is for.
> Texas generates more renewable energy than any other state
No doubt. There's a lot of potential there and enterprising folk are trying to take advantage of it.
> and Texas invests a hell of a lot of money into renewables
Does "Texas", or do a range of private groups (including from outside Texas) invest this money?
What's the breakdown of subsidies for fossil fuel projects vs renewable projects?
You can't pat Texas officials who are staunchly anti-renewables and anti-climate science for the private groups who are investing in renewables.
Oh and while we are here:
ThePrince14 t1_j8v0h3d wrote
You’re completely moving the goalposts on the argument at hand. Again, the fact remains that investment in renewables in Texas is very healthy and has contributed to the state generating more power from renewables than any other state. That doesn’t happen if you believe same old Reddit’s tired tropes that Texas is the right wing devil determined to destroy everything progressive. If all these super powerful people in the state are actively anti-renewable and discouraging development of renewables in Texas, why is it so prominent and continuing to grow?
And since you brought it up, please educate us on what those fossil fuel “subsidies” actually are and how they work. I think if you were to actually educate yourself on the mechanism with which these “subsidies” work, you’d realize that again, Reddit parades out the same BS uninformed information over and over.
Spoiler alert, people like to call any sort of tax break for oil and gas companies a “subsidy” so they can perpetuate their narratives. Many of these tax breaks are the same sort of tax breaks that any business in any industry gets. I’ll give you an example, say you start a business that manufactures doorknobs. You build your own factory that manufactures those doorknobs and start selling them. Businesses generally get to write off the cost of building that factory as a capital expenditure against their profits. That’s not a subsidy in the way most people think about subsidies. But when it comes to oil and gas, people want to further their narratives, so they lump in capital investments and call it a subsidy.
CoffeeFox t1_j8vffz7 wrote
> You’re completely moving the goalposts on the argument at hand.
You seem to be used to practicing arguments in a mirror, and forgot there isn't one present here.
They stayed on-point about messaging of elected officials and overall government policy and you danced around looking for an inroad to make deceptive generalizations regarding private entities that was fairly well off-topic right from the beginning.
It isn't "moving the goalposts" to repeatedly inform you that you are unsuccessfully trying different approaches of arguing with things that nobody even said, and it's ironic in the extreme to attempt to start up a game of Calvinball and then use that argument. "You're not allowed to do what I keep doing!" is... well, bless your heart.
ThePrince14 t1_j8wdz7q wrote
Nice, I struck Reddit’s nerve where they don’t have a rebuttal to actual data, so people just downvote and come up with generalizations. Why are you so against actual data, and just use clickbait articles to further your confirmation bias? Don’t you realize that’s exactly what the “other side”, who you hate so dearly also does?
HimEatLotsOfFishEggs t1_j8wffzg wrote
Those’re a lot of important phrases and ideas you’re regurgitating there, bud. Remember to drink lots of water to keep your throat well-lubricated, and take thirty-minute breaks should you get tired!
ThePrince14 t1_j8wg16h wrote
Oh man, do I love when I strike this nerve. You can tell that people have no actual knowledge, so they just resort to comments like this instead of being able to have an informed discussion about this stuff.
[deleted] t1_j8wn6h6 wrote
[deleted]
ThePrince14 t1_j8wurxu wrote
That’s because the original premise comes from the same old Reddit BS that the state of Texas is just a bunch of right wing nut jobs and is against anything progressive. The burden of proof is on OP to actually provide that evidence instead of parroting everything that gets said in every reddit thread. My rebuttal was actual data saying that there is actually a ton of renewable investment in Texas, and if Texas was as bad as Reddit wants to perpetuate, there wouldn’t be the massive amount of investment there is. If the most powerful people in the state are working so hard to discourage and ban renewables, then why does there continue to be a massive amount of investment in renewables in the state?
https://www.utilitydive.com/news/texas-clean-energy-bechtel-solar-hydrogen-construction/638739/
Reddit is so committed to the narrative that Texas is this terrible right wing devil that it refuses to look at actual data.
When it comes to fossil fuel “subsidies” that Reddit loves to bitch about, read up on what they actually are:
Focusing on oil and gas, there’s two main direct subsidies received - intangible drilling credits and percentage depletion. These are “subsidies” or more accurately tax write offs similar to write offs any business in any industry would get. Intangible drilling credits just let the company write off part of their capital investment in drilling wells, which is the same as if an airline used capital to buy airplanes, that’s a write off against their profits.
The percentage depletion is also an accounting method that is used in many industries, like if a company built a factory producing goods, they depreciate that over a certain period of time, which is again a write off on taxes.
Then you have the indirect subsidies, which are again just the same accounting practices any company in the US would use.
So please use actual data to show my how my argument is actually shite instead of pulling a couple of clickbait articles and ignoring what Texas is actually doing in practice.
[deleted] t1_j8wxkrs wrote
[deleted]
skolioban t1_j8x4cwz wrote
What data?? You haven't shown any data. And if your point was "Texas has a lot of renewables" then no one is arguing against that. The argument was "Texas officials are against renewables" and the other guy showed that data. You haven't shown anything, except hints that you're arguing against a strawman.
StabbyPants t1_j8uupe4 wrote
I can argue that the state may make it impractical via regulation. They did try to pin the February disaster on green energy, and it’s the same people today
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments