Home | About | Donate

'What the Future Can Look Like': Study Shows US Switch to 100% Renewables Can Save Billions and the Planet, Too

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/10/22/what-future-can-look-study-shows-us-switch-100-renewables-can-save-billions-and

Nobody is going to see that $1,050-$2,585 a year savings unless we keep renewables out of the hands of corporate control.

7 Likes

True… and agreed.

3 Likes

Buy your own, Go off grid
It’s basically plug and play now
Not like the old days
I studied and passed my NABCEP at 62
Seriously plug and play
And you get to say GOODBYE to your utility company
That one alone is TOO MUCH FUN

4 Likes

“what the future can look like if we are motivated to make it so.”
Yes.
On top of all that was mentioned in the article are the savings the average homeowner might see in his home insurance as the hurricane destruction caused by the effect fossil fuel combustion has is lessened. The seas would regain the dying coral on their reefs and more fish would live there to be harvested, And threatening coastal waters would retreat as more water would be reabsorbed as ice as it was prior to the age of oil.

2 Likes

I agree, but most won’t have that option (still a large out of pocket expense), and there are some states that protect the power companies by making it hard to do, or illegal all to gather.

4 Likes

Southeastern US states’ gubmits go so far as to allow utilities to charge customers for the cost nuke plants that are still under construction.

I’ve got a 10kW solar installation and I love it!. Grid tied though as batteries are still too expensive to get adequate capacity to run things (like AC here in Florida). 10kw , if you do it yourself, is around $15-20K with another $10-15K for batteries if you want to go off-grid with modern conveniences. The solar PV panels will last for 20-30 years but plan on replacing your batteries and inverters every 10-12 years.

4 Likes

Members of our electric coop spent years urging the governing board to purchase excess power generated by solar customers, but it finally took a wealthy horse farm owner to tip the scale in our favor. Money talks, as they say.

2 Likes

the simple fact is the capitalists have been lying to us for decades as they degrade our world’s ecosystems for their profits–bribe politicians to do their dirty work and make a mockery of sanity

the disease is capitalism–it is killing us—and virtually everyone of our so called “leaders” is in thrall to the killers-- FOR THE MONEY they can get from the ones with the business plan that ends with the destruction of our world and the greatest crime ever wrought on the planet–the ecocide that is the 6th Great Extinction( now in progress in your neighborhood)–that is the death of every living thing–FOR THE MONEY

3 Likes

How we can provide sustainable energy for 10 billion people at the same level as the world did for 3 billion people back in the 1960s

~https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378020307512?via%3Dihub

A useful link for challenging those over-population alarmists.

The ball is in their court to change the system if they want a solution.

~https://www.wspus.org/

1 Like

Capitalism requires constant growth to succeed. You can’t have infinite growth on a finite planet. It is doomed to fail.

1 Like

Obviously renewables are the only sane solution, but who it would save money, and at whose expense?
The oligarchy depends on oil for both their global currency and their warmachine.
Oil is a vital part of their power base, especially now that their propaganda efforts are frequently falling apart along with the percieved legitimacy of their “governments”.
Therefore, they will never allow renewables to replace oil until they have found a way to monopolize the technology and fuel their wars.
They will also have to come up with a new monetary scheme under their control that can replace the dollar (see cashless society).
The global oligarchy and the corporations that shield them are the primary impediment to our collective survival, and they will never give up an ounce of their imaginary power. Not even if it means the end of all life. Therefore, either they die or we all do.

2 Likes

I don’t think rickshaw51 is promoting capitalism, rather, the opposite.

1 Like

Capitalism requires constant growth to succeed I’m not sure I agree with you on that. Maybe modern monopolistic Corporate Capitalism requires that, but non-monopolistic businesses can certainly exist successfully for decades without constant growth. A good family-run restaurant or niche manufacturing plant can provide sustenance for a number of employees and fill community needs. The real problem comes when quasi-monopolies like Microsoft, Google, Nike or Apple use their funds to buy up potential competitors and politicians. Unless we limit corporate market share to something on the order of 5%, these quasi-monopolies will continue to control the government.

Capitalism is usually conflated with free or fair markets, innovation, entrepreneurs, the freedom of individuals in the marketplace, etc. But things these are seperate from capitalism.
A business is not by definition capitalism, so what you are describing is not capitalism.
Capital can be defined as an asset that can generate additional value without being consumed.
Capitalism is the reduction of the natural world (or anything of value) to that of capital.
You can further subcategorize it it by what is being reduced to capital, such as monetary capital or human capital etc.
Captialism has often been descrbed as psychopathy applied to economics, which i think sums it up perfectly.
Your contention was that capitalism does not require infinite growth, which it does and i will attempt to explain why.
Lets use monetary capital as an example.
Money does not generate value without being consumed, therefore it needs something external to generate value.
The most important feature of “monetary capitalism” is that money is extremely fungible, that is, something that can easily be traded or substituted by or for something else.
Lets say there is a war, I might want to invest in shares of companies that make weapons. When their weapons business grows, their revenues and their profits grow, and their dividend or stock value will grow.
When the war ends and the weapons business no longer grows, the monetary capitalist will convert the shares back into, more monetary capital than they had before.
Capitalists then take most of the new capital generated by the investment in war and determine that all those disabled veterans will need long-term care, so they might invest in health care, or drugs, or companies that make laboratory or diagnostic equipment. That, too, will grow as these people age and need more services, or as hospitals and pharmaceutical companies raise their fees and prices. When the veterans start to die off or someone introduces a health care plan that doesn’t cover drugs with bloated prices, their capital no longer grow, so once again they cash in their shares, which hopefully have grown in value since I purchased them, and look for something new.
The point here is that to generate value, monetary capital needs to “consume” what is euphomistically called externalities. The more money you have the more growth is needed to generate value, therefore monetary capitalism requires endless growth to function.
Obviously we could stop consuming, stop trying to generate more value, but that would nolonger be capitalism.
.

2 Likes

I was supporting Rickshaw’s position. Sorry if it wasn’t clear.

1 Like

No problem, my own words frequently fail to provide clarity in the representation of my thoughts,
…bad words!
:slight_smile:

It will take many years for some of those things to be repaired; generations or millennia for most of them.