Slashdot Mirror


The Koch Brothers Attack On Solar Energy

Hugh Pickens DOT Com (2995471) writes "The NYT writes in an editorial that for the last few months, the Koch brothers and their conservative allies in state government have been spending heavily to fight incentives for renewable energy, by pushing legislatures to impose a surtax on this increasingly popular practice, hoping to make installing solar panels on houses less attractive. 'The coal producers' motivation is clear: They see solar and wind energy as a long-term threat to their businesses. That might seem distant at the moment, when nearly 40 percent of the nation's electricity is still generated by coal, and when less than 1 percent of power customers have solar arrays. But given new regulations on power-plant emissions of mercury and other pollutants, and the urgent need to reduce global warming emissions, the future clearly lies with renewable energy.' For example, the Arizona Public Service Company, the state's largest utility, funneled large sums through a Koch operative to a nonprofit group that ran an ad claiming net metering would hurt older people on fixed incomes (video) by raising electric rates. The ad tried to link the requirement to President Obama. Another Koch ad likens the renewable-energy requirement to health care reform, the ultimate insult in that world. 'Like Obamacare, it's another government mandate we can't afford,' the narrator says. 'That line might appeal to Tea Partiers, but it's deliberately misleading,' concludes the editorial. 'This campaign is really about the profits of Koch Carbon and the utilities, which to its organizers is much more important than clean air and the consequences of climate change.'"

15 of 769 comments (clear)

  1. Buggy whips? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seems like it is only a matter of time until coal power goes away. It will be a long time, granted, but in the next decade or two solar will get so cheap that the impact on traditional centralized generation will be quite severe. I guess they are watching what is happening in Germany with horror and realizing that is their future too.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Buggy whips? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Coal seems safe because the consequences are diffuse enough not to be noticed. A few thousand more people impaired by mercury exposure, a couple more hurricanes a year - but nothing you can point to and declare 'Coal did this.'

    2. Re:Buggy whips? by rmstar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is a very real problemâ"it's not just some rich people being assholes, but rather some rich people who stand to become substantially less rich if things go the way they seem to be going.

      I thought the actual story was that if you or me dislike some policy we can go fuck ourselves, whereas if the Kochs dislike it, they get a real chance to change it.

      An oligarchy indeed.

      What I also find a little unsettling is that most commenters, including you, don't seem to think much of that power imbalance (or even be aware of it) directly jumping to the solar vs. no solar issue.

    3. Re:Buggy whips? by MrNaz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is a very real problem

      No, it's not really. The world has survived plenty of instances of entire technological paradigms becoming obsolete. Fossil fuels will become obsolete sooner or later, and the world will be better off for it. It's just a question of how long the elite (like the Koch brothers) can hold the welfare of the entire world hostage to their pointless shell game.

      --
      I hate printers.
    4. Re:Buggy whips? by jonwil · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If some rich person becomes less rich because people no longer want the dirty polluting coal their companies extract from the ground, GOOD. If that means a bunch of people no longer have a job going down into a hole every day digging out that filthy stuff, GOOD.

      Just like the motor car made the horse obsolete as a means of transport, there will come a time when mankind invents a technology (or technologies) that make the use of coal for generating electricity obsolete and that will be a GOOD thing for the planet.

    5. Re:Buggy whips? by kilfarsnar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I thought the actual story was that if you or me dislike some policy we can go fuck ourselves, whereas if the Kochs dislike it, they get a real chance to change it.

      If anyone ever wonders why fabulously rich people want to keep making more money, this is why. Money=Political Power in America. It's not about how many yachts, houses or G4's you have, once you're in the billionaires club. It's about how many Senators you have doing your bidding, and how many news stations you have framing your views. Like Walter White, they are in the empire business.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    6. Re:Buggy whips? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're under the mistaken impression that they're out to make money.

      They are not. They've already won that game. Once you reach a certain level of rich making more becomes irrelevant. When you can buy anything that's for sale you're done.

      These people are out to become kings. Literal monarchs. They only thing standing in their way is this thing called the "middle class". It's no coincidence that every policy pushed by these oligarchs is specifically designed to destroy the earning power, social mobility, and well being of everyone that's.. Well, not them.

      And it's working. The wealth gap is increasing at breakneck speeds. Your wages are stagnating. The social safety nets that keep you from falling in to poverty are evaporating. Your parents could buy a house, two cars, and send 2 kids to college on a single income with a high school diploma. You cannot.

      You are being attacked. When will you start fighting back?

    7. Re:Buggy whips? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Solyndra

      Subsidized "Green" energy in a nutshell.

      But, if you're a left wing nutjob who see "evil" only on the right side then by all means keep yelling "Koch Brothers". And pay no attention to Harry Reid's deal with the Chinese to land a job for his son in the Nevada Desert, under the auspices of "saving the tortoise".

      Corruption in the Political class is both (D) and (R), but until you realize that the enemy isn't the guys with the (R) behind their name, you're just substituting one "evil" for another. And at that point, you might as well go Cthulhu.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    8. Re:Buggy whips? by Dishevel · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The problem is not the "Koch Brothers" or "Big Oil" or "Big Pharma" or "The Unions" or "Warren Buffet" or how much they spend on commercials.

      The problem is the people that vote because of the last commercial they saw. There are a lot of uninformed, stupid, lazy people who think it is a good idea that they vote anyway.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
  2. I'm assuming here... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...that you disapprove just as much of Michael Bloomberg (another billionaire that spends a lot of money trying to influence politics) when he decides to buy a "grass roots" effort as you do when the Koch Brothers try to do so?

    Or does the choice of cause mean that one billionaire trying to influence politics is worse than the other billionaire trying to influence politics?

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    1. Re:I'm assuming here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Buying influence in politics is bad enough without people trying to make scientific issues political.

  3. Greedy douchebags. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    America is being made worse by what the rich choose to fight.

    They're more interested in protecting their own (sizable) wealth than they are about the future of humanity, the environment, or anything else.

    These assholes should be suspended over the smokestack of a coal plant for about 6 months.

  4. Subsidized corporations fighting against subsidies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Can you spot the irony in all this? These corporations that are fighting against government subsidized green energy are all those who have themselves grown enormously through different types of government subsidies.

    It's amazing how well the twisted corporationist logic sinks into the general public. The corporations on one hand speak for capitalism and free market, but on the other they cling to government subsidies and form monopolies effectively wiping out any competition on their markets.

    Roosevelt once stated that this type of centralization of power in the private sector that corporations have today, could eventually lead to fascism. In some way, I don't think he was too far off.

  5. Re:Heh. by Luckyo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Shills from coal industry in Germany talk about German Energiewende like about manna from heaven. They're massively building up coal and firing up all the old plants as much as they can becuase of it and raking in massive profits.

    If I could be seen to be shilling for anything, it's not shutting down fission in Germany and replacing it with coal, as Energiewende has basically done.

  6. It doesn't have to supply all our power by sjbe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Using locally produced solar energy in a northern area that sees peak energy usage in the middle of winter is not really a good idea

    They don't use air conditioning in Germany? Solar isn't going to fix every problem but even if it can solve just part of the problem then it remains a good idea. Why would you not want to use relatively clean solar energy for at least those times when it is available? The only credible argument against solar power is an economic one. No it will not be able to supply all our power needs but neither is any other single source of fuel. They all have drawbacks of one sort or another. What seems abundantly clear however is that any technology that allows us to reduce use of fossil fuels at reasonable economic cost is a good thing.

    There is this stupid tendency here on slashdot to dismiss partial solutions to any problem as unworkable. Solar does not have to supply all our energy needs to still be a good idea. The economics of it still need to make sense but there is no principled reason why it should not be a significant part of the energy supply equation.