This isn’t the first incarnation of “the Green New Deal”, and I doubt it’ll be the last. What’s fascinating this time around- is the total lack of understanding in how the Climate really works OVER THE EONs. The fear engulfing its proponents makes sense though. These ‘kids’ grew up being overwhelmed with “scientific opinions” (rather than actual hard, context driven facts) being blasted into their sensitive and still-developing frontal cortices with one key piece of information:
WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE!
~Al Gore
In the past, this type of virality was by all measurements- expensive. Most kids didn’t have real-time access to other kids or poorly informed “adults”. With that protective layer in place, it protected us from poorly researched, mis-understood information and encouraged us to do our own diligence. If we didn’t take the time to understand things, we weren’t afraid of them. If we weren’t afraid of them, we didn’t worry about them and lead much happier [ignorant] lives.
These days- “If it bleeds it leads” not only takes on a whole new meaning, it often times defines “what’s real and what’s not”. The reaction we’re seeing now makes nothing but sense. All these kids ACTUALLY BELIEVE we are all going to die. Topping it off, they’re being abused by most of the entrenched interests who’ll do anything to make money from the panic. It’s really really sad.
Your Brain, Is Making Shit Up as it Goes.
Does this mean climate change doesn’t exist? It does, and it has for EONs. However, if you’ve done any research into this, you’ll very quickly understand that the climate is always changing. The kicker though is in understanding not so much if our temperatures are rising, but what happens if they start falling. We can still sustain a degree or two increase, we probably can’t sustain a multi-degree decrease.
There are things we can control in our own environment that we should (eg: pollution, waste, etc), no arguments there. However, what do we do when this spaceship of ours starts its orbit a few degrees away from the sun? What if we are in that “slight warming period” (in the multi-billion year history) and things start shifting back to ‘normal’ (eg: ICE Age). How many people are prepared for that? What if the burning of dead animals is the ONLY way to keep life sustainable in those circumstances? I’m not saying this is going to happen, but are we setup to protect ourselves from things OUTSIDE of our control?
You Wouldn’t Even Know.
During my last 37 rotations around the sun, I’ve come to learn two simple things about life, progress and hype. If it bleeds it leads, and actual break-through technology almost never hits the front page news. In fact, we could crack and demonstrate efficient fusion power tomorrow, and nobody would notice. There are so many entrenched interests in both the “green energy” markets as well as the “fossil fuel” markets, that the dis-information campaigns of both would take DECADES to get rid of.
Remember how controversial smoking was? Fifty years later we’re still dealing with those after-effects. What are we going to do with all those lithium batteries in 20 years? How about those used solar panels? Do you want that toxic waste stored in your backyard? Nuclear waste is tiny and plants consume CO2. Mercury, lead and toxic metals kill kids, literally.
The world doesn’t change overnight and contrary to what ill-informed politicians (or actors, whatever you want to call them) suggest, we almost never need some “Grand Bargain” to solve what we THINK are “HOLY SHIT WE ARE GOING TO DIE IF…” problems. In a lot of cases, the technologies we need to shift our way of life already exist in some form, they’re just not sexy. Because they’re not sexy, they don’t get headlines, because they don’t get headlines, nobody digs further into those subjects to fully grok what they’re capable of. Instead we have to slog through the paid-for bullshit [on both-sides] and oftentimes get sucked up in the hype.
Everyone just assumes if they were going to “save the world”, the NYT would have told us so already. Here’s the problem though, they don’t advertise with the NYT, so why would the NYT write about them? In fact, the people who spend money at the NYT are probably the same groups of people this new technology would unseat. Why write about Liquid Metal Batteries of you core customer is heavily invested in Oil, Solar or Lithium Ion?
Liquid Metal Batteries
It’s talks like these that make me chuckle, especially when I hear people talk about ‘renewables’. Hardly anyone really looks at this from a ground up perspective and is willing to play the long game (ADHD? Have you read this far? Good Job!). When you solve for “the most efficient way to STORE energy given what you actually HAVE vs what you WANT”, then it doesn’t matter WHERE that energy actually comes from. Let that sink in for a moment.
IT DOES NOT MATTER WHERE THE ENERGY COMES FROM.
What’s interesting about the Liquid Metal Battery, is its simplicity. It’s not complex, which means it scales cleanly. It’s simple which means it’s easy [and cheap] to produce. If you puncture it, it freezes. It doesn’t blow up, which means you can put one in your backyard. It also doesn’t lose much of its capacity over long periods of time, which means that 30 year investment won’t degrade like a solar panel!
Stop listening to people who have no idea what they’re talking about. Start thinking about the core problem we’re trying to solve. YouTube is your friend, for the first time in history you can learn about anything. You simply need to turn off the social media, and turn on the Tube.
(Your Mom will be proud ;))
Barely3am 