Walking Forward

in LeoFinance2 years ago

It is funny how minds change on the back of changing conditions, where for example Finnish politicians formally opposed to nuclear power are now "coming around" to it, as prices have increased and the supply is looking a bit shakier through the winter. Meanwhile, Helen, the Helsinki Energy provider has recorded a 300% increase in YoY profits, after raising their prices by 58% in October, and will do another 60% on top in December.

Weirdly, the Greens are the ones who are the most against nuclear power, even though it is pretty much the only solution in the mid-term for energy needs, especially if we are going to keep wanting to charge all of those electric cars. There is little point having "green" cars, if fossil fuels are burned to create the electricity for them.

image.png

Living by ideals is a losing game, as is not working toward fulfilling ideals. While we tend to want things quicker than they are deliverable, we also have the tendency to undermine the path to have them, due to our impatience. Development takes time and while there are many ways to speed up the process, bending the will toward innovation takes time also. Nuclear power isn't the end goal of clean energy, it is a stepping stone. The end goal would be a completely free and clean energy source that can be used without having any negative impacts on the environment at all - but what are the chances of having anything even remotely close to that, if there isn't a development process in place?

MVPs

Minimal Viable Products, not "Most Valuable Players".

Rather than developing everything to its complete state before release, it is a process of continual improvement upon the last iteration, where the first is just enough to do the immediate job at hand in order to bring value. Getting a fast Time to Value (TTV) means being able to start generating value that can justify and facilitate the next development stage.

However, this is a challenge for many to watch, as they have been sold on the future but don't have the necessary understanding to see all the steps between from now until then. Pretty much, if it was up to this kind of mentality, nothing of note would ever be accomplished, let alone industries get built.

But often, things in development don't go quite according to plan and negative outcomes are also realized, which breeds the idea of "better the devil you know" ideology, restricting growth and development in favor of stagnation out of fear. And something like nuclear energy creates a lot of fear in people, because when things go wrong, they can go very wrong. However, it isn't 1986 now either and there are far better checks and balances in place to further mitigate risks.

It isn't a progress at any cost position, nor should it be a reaction to immediate acute conditions. but looking at the trajectory of our energy needs globally and the direction that energy usage is headed, something has to be done and it is foolhardy to think that it is going to be by way of convincing people to consume less.

People like convenience.

But, they also like to have ideals.

And this creates a breeding ground for hypocrisy, where there is the will to want to do something, but the behavior of doing something else. Lots of words get spoken, but actions don't follow behind, meaning that nothing really changes, especially since there is plenty of lobbying by those who benefit from keeping it the same to maintain the status quo.

As said though, it is a process of development and we are probably on average, trending toward better, but the question is whether we will get there in time to make a positive enough difference to save us from a negative outcome. But, even if it is a lost cause, does that mean it isn't worth trying for?

Perhaps it is in the "cause" of it, where people want to feel a part of something larger than themselves. However, I think that we have created a far less creative society in general, which has led us to stand against something, rather than for something.

As I see it, when standing for something, it is an active position where there is the possibility to add to the development, to be part of the improvement process. However, when standing against something, it is about limiting what others are doing. There are times where this is necessary, but standing against can't be the only position, there also has to be the standing for being part of the alternative, otherwise, the game will inevitably be lost, sooner or later.

The conditions are never perfect for perfect, they are only ever good enough for what is imperfectly possible within them.

Progress is walking forward.

Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Sort:  

Weirdly, the Greens are the ones who are the most against nuclear power, even though it is pretty much the only solution in the mid-term for energy needs, especially if we are going to keep wanting to charge all of those electric cars. There is little point having "green" cars, if fossil fuels are burned to create the electricity for them.

I would guess that burning coal to generate the electricity to run a car would be worse than using gasoline (somebody not named me has surely crunched the numbers) but natural gas to electricity might be better, if still not green.

Nuclear energy may be green in that it doesn’t emit hydrocarbons, but if things go bad, they can go really bad. A lot of it’s about perceptions. Public acceptance of nuclear power may have improved in recent years but another Chernobyl could turn people off in a big way; just look how Japanese public opinion shifted after Fukushima.
And then there’s the problem of what to do with the waste. When I was a kid, a solution to that problem was just around the corner. It’s proven to be a mighty long corner.
Fast breeder, thorium reactors, and fusion might be widespread someday, but no time soon.
Right now though, there’s just not the infrastructure for widespread adoption of electric vehicles. Huge sums need to go into building it. And we probably need next-generation batteries with current lithium-based energy storage just a stopgap measure.

Natural gas is better I think. What has been interesting is that natural gas is common here for electricity production, and the storage tanks are full - yet the electricity prices are still up.

A lot of it’s about perceptions.

For sure - I am old enough to have a bit of Chernobyl in me too. At the same time, there is quite a difference between today and 1986 Ukraine. Fukushima was a bit of a freak event - bad design for sure though and that is always a risk.

It is all part of progress though and perhaps it is better to go "out with a bang" than wither slowly into oblivion.

Battery tech has a very long way to go still, but just imagine if development had continued for the last 100 years, instead of combustion engines taking hold.

There are options for energy. Lots of options, for the individual. However the individual in a lot of cases can not afford them. Solar, wind heat sink building, local geothermal.

Battery tech it seems is improving a lot, but after the headlines of battery improvement, no new stories get put out.

Nuclear is know, and has improved. Nuclear has not only provided power it has provided the power for alternative energy production. People tend to have that "not in my backyard" attitude toward it, so it foster the urge of many to find alternatives.

I hope they do go nuclear, more countries need to shore up their energy production, this will bring more alternative energy people into the game from more parts of the world.

geothermal heating here is about 30K for a household. we have an air/water heat exchange system which is about 70% of that price, but still needs enough electricity to make price increases painful.

Would love a solar roof array, at least for 8 months of the year, but it is well out of our price range currently. We have to replace the roof and if we could go full solar, we would - but costs...

There are also new options for "mini nuclear" reactors, that produce far less but are fast and much cheaper to build. Having them spread around might be a better option.

As the cost of electricity goes up, as it is here also going up, there hopefully will be people willing to find cheaper alternatives to offer home owners. Solar took a pretty big hit in America when the electric companies started to lose money from people disconnecting. They cried foul because of all the lines and telephone poles they need to maintain, so started charging even people not connected to the power company for maintaining the infrastructure. It all started in Oklahoma State. They were the first to start charging people. So that made solar even more expensive since people still had an electric bill.

It seems the home owners are screwed no matter what they do to try and save money.

There are a lot of issues with people that will just oppose something, which is an issue in itself, but also not offering any damn alternative solutions. I agree that it’s one thing to be against something but it’s fruitless to just be opposed but not have an idea of what’s better or where things should be going.

Nuclear energy is incredibly different than it used to be however one thing I am cautious about is we know how inept governments are and how much people want to attack things, combine those and I’m shaky on the ability of people to have a good nuclear power plant that can be built in contemporary times.

but it’s fruitless to just be opposed but not have an idea of what’s better or where things should be going.

It is like a religious mindset or something - just against what they don't know.

one thing I am cautious about is we know how inept governments are and how much people want to attack things

Yep. The biggest thing in our way, is ourselves.

Nuclear is the only viable way now and in the foreseeable future to maintain energy security, until other “green” technologies advance.

On the flip side, how much incentive will there be to invest in other technologies if nuclear solved all the needs and there is no more frictions and inconvenience as motivation?

The incentive is a problem, as I am sure that once accepted and in use, there will be nuclear lobby groups to keep them there, similar to the oil lobbyists now.

for now nuclear power seems like a smart choice.

Yeah, I think it likely is the only choice for many places.

Nuclear energy, as a temporary measure, for 20-30 years, why not. Now nuclear power plants have become safer than before.

Yep, it is a stop-gap, but it is still a step in the right direction.

I think we are really close to having some very safe options for nuclear power. I have been following a couple of companies and if they can follow through, it could turn the page on a lot of the past fears and drawbacks. Then, maybe eventually we will see fusion power. I am more skeptical on that than I was a month ago though.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Fusion is the dream, but I wonder if it will ever eventuate. Been hearing about it for 40 years now and sit still seems a long way off.

Yeah, for a while there I was seeing articles indicating they might be close, but I think it was all hype. SMRs is where we should be focusing right now. Exciting stuff.

About 7 years ago, the UK govt signed a contract for a new nuclear power plant (which is currently being built) with EDF, with a fixed strike price of £92 per MWh.

Cue the press and opposition going crazy and bashing the government for "overpaying".

Fast forward to 2022 and electricity is being sold for £323 per MWh, having hit £560 per MWh in August.

The govt deal on the nuclear is now looking very good! Thank goodness they resisted caving to the know-nothings in the media.

Lol - that is interesting!!
How are you managing with the changing prices? Was talking to one of my UK colleagues yesterday about it and he was saying that as a home owner (mortgage payer) things are a bit of a worry, and he is on a very good wicket.

Grocery prices are going up quite fast here. Some people think it's to do with high fertilizer costs. Some people think it's down to the weak pound. It's probably a combination.


~~~ embed:1587490218990399488 twitter metadata:MTg3NTkzNDQ4Mnx8aHR0cHM6Ly90d2l0dGVyLmNvbS8xODc1OTM0NDgyL3N0YXR1cy8xNTg3NDkwMjE4OTkwMzk5NDg4fA== ~~~
The rewards earned on this comment will go directly to the people( @shiftrox, @shohana1 ) sharing the post on Twitter as long as they are registered with @poshtoken. Sign up at https://hiveposh.com.

Congratulations @tarazkp! You received a personal badge!

You powered-up at least 10 HIVE on Hive Power Up Day!
Wait until the end of Power Up Day to find out the size of your Power-Bee.
May the Hive Power be with you!

You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking

Check out the last post from @hivebuzz:

Hive Power Up Month Challenge 2022-10 - Winners List
Be ready for the 11th edition of the Hive Power Up Month!
Hive Power Up Day - November 1st 2022

And this creates a breeding ground for hypocrisy, where there is the will to want to do something, but the behavior of doing something else. Lots of words get spoken, but actions don't follow behind, meaning that nothing really changes, especially since there is plenty of lobbying by those who benefit from keeping it the same to maintain the status quo.

Yeah, that pisses me off the most. I bet 99% of them don't know what they're talking about at all. How are regular people going to want to understand this nonsense...?

Nuclear is the only valid option with the huge push towards cleaner energy and it never really made sense to me. After all, the energy production just can't keep up and getting rid of gas/oil won't be solving anything. So I think nuclear is the best option and technology has improved a lot so I don't think there will be much chance of a nuclear leak.

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

Once upon a time a politican said a phrase which has been then popular for politics. It means let bygones be bygones, literally;

Yesterday is yesterday, today is today.

This is such an objective, intelligent and inspiring post 👏

More good questions and more clever statements that, I think, we don't really consider enough.

Like these:
 

there is the will to want to do something, but the behavior of doing something else.

 

actions don't follow behind, meaning that nothing really changes

 

standing against can't be the only position, there also has to be the standing for being part of the alternative, otherwise, the game will inevitably be lost, sooner or later.

 

And I really like the way you describe development as well!

We keep walking forward then... fearlessly and with open minds to change the things that aren't working. And understanding that things may not go as planned, but if we're open-minded and awake we can make a plan to address them :) 👍

Shouldn't I agree by 1000 percent thatprogress is walking forward sure I agree with this. Checking on the price of the market most are shining and making some significant progress it's possible our December is gonna be a great one who knows.
What actually make people to make a return steps to what they turned against at first is most times a call for deep thinking. Possibly they there wasn't need for such at first. Nuclear power might not be a great idea yesterday but challenges of today could call for it lol this is life nothing is ever steady. Recycling is all I think of.