Insane.
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.
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.
This is all in their wheelhouse: mega-scale construction, off-shore ops, dealing with the government in favorable ways, and such a simpler and lower-risk business!
It must be that they are just afraid of the entire idea of a competing sector? Or, they are addicted to the power they have controlling a more centralized energy distribution system? Or, what could it be? Again, I know these are not dumb people.
Some of them do, e.g. Ørsted here in Denmark is a former gas and oil extraction company which then became the biggest developer of offshore wind in the world. Trump has, by the way, been fighting the wind farm that they're setting up in the US currently ever since he came into office.
"no skin off his nose" but a dreadful inflationary weight on future tax payers.
We are building lots. Of everything.
This is about one company bending the knee, not an entire industry or population.
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.
If it takes just one retard at the top to disrupt a massive decades-long project, even in a way that eventually gets negated by a court, then ta-da, we just don't get any more big projects.
I know this place has become a political cesspool like reddit, but I implore you to think a little beyond "Trump bad".
I implore you to think a little bit about what degree of political, policy, and economic stability is actually required for anyone to embark on decades-long, multi-billion dollar infrastructure projects, instead of resorting to "hurrr durrrr it's above zero amirite?"
Aloofness is not the sign of intelligence you wish it to be.
Did you read the headline?
Do you know what article you're commenting on?
We're now onto Captain Planet baddies. Ridiculously childish cartoon carictatures of greed and evil are now in charge
From that angle, Idiocracy is notably BETTER than our current situation.
Renewable energy sources heavily reduce this factor, make countries more independent from imports (other countries) and slow down the catastrophic effects of increased atmospheric energy due to greenhouse effect of carbon-based energy sources.
Conservatives should be the top number one supporters of renewable energy because of more independence from other governments and better conservation of the environment.
But alas, the only thing they like to preserve is their personal greed.
What the hell is happening over there? Why can't they get 'energy' despite being a scientifically literate nation. France has a far superior energy policy so it's not like you even have to travel beyond a few miles to see a wildly different price for electricity. At this rate French electricity will be half the price in a few years compared to German electricity. Germany is making mistake after mistake on energy. From Russian dependence to Nuclear scepticism to now accepting money to not build renewables.
Germany itself has a huge offshore wind industry, which is probably how they have companies that planned to do the same in the US.
Sure, keeping the entire nuclear fleet from ~2000 would have maybe helped, but would have required very costly (economically and politically!) investments over the last few decades, and those basically went into renewables instead which turned out fine.
See: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-prod-source-s...
Its funny that the term "net exporter" is about the volume of energy, not the value of energy.
Electricity production is a subset of energy production. A lot of factories use natural gas directly, they don't produce electricity first. ICE cars also use petrol directly, they don't first generate electricity.
It's also funny how air conditioning powered by electricity is discouraged, while air conditioning in ICE cars or gas heating in buildings are at the very least tolerated. It's crazy if you think about it.
Taxation and cost for the net are very different with a higher price for the connection in France and a higher price per kWh in Germany. In the end for a normal use of electricity the prices are very comparable.
No wait, they’re not learning it the hard way because they’ve already got rid of them. Phew…