2016 USA Presidential election thread I: The warm-up

[notorious bum]

You conveniently leave out the prison industrial complex from this equation. You perpetuate the whole "social bubble" that us science nerds are given hell for. You bitch at me for trying to directly compare issues, which I really don't have interest in doing, I was simply pointing out that our energy deficiencies are much more complex and easier to politically manipulate than the simple problem of legalizing a fucking plant.

This isn't rocket science. The criminalizing of a plant destroys entire communities, renders lives sub-human in our society, and prevents people from finding what little relief they can get from debilitating mental and physical issues.

[BerenTebogo]

You conveniently leave out the prison industrial complex from this equation. You perpetuate the whole "social bubble" that us science nerds are given hell for. You bitch at me for trying to directly compare issues, which I really don't have interest in doing, I was simply pointing out that our energy deficiencies are much more complex and easier to politically manipulate than the simple problem of legalizing a fucking plant.

This isn't rocket science. The criminalizing of a plant destroys entire communities, renders lives sub-human in our society, and prevents people from finding what little relief they can get from debilitating mental and physical issues.

I wasn't arguing your point on the criminalization at all because it is correct. You fallaciously misrepresent the health benefits of marijuana, which is what I am arguing with you about currently.

Edit: I edited my last posted with data showing that minorities and the elderly were at greater risk of death due to heat/cold than other demographics, which was what I was trying to tie back to the original point.

[BerenTebogo]

You are aware that a not insignificant number of installed winter heating solutions are fuel based not electric based, so see no benefit from energy gains, right?
And if you have trouble affording heating, you probably can't afford a refit anyway.

Say, which candidate is the most likely to tackle issues relating to the average persons income? Hmmm, name is on the tip of my tongue, but it's just not coming to me at the moment.

"A not insignificant number"

Thanks, good contribution.

[Cantih]

Fuck me, I don't know the exact goddamn installation percentages off the top of my head, do you?
But whenever I hear people complaining about the cost of winter heating in the news, they are specifically mentioning fuel prices, not electricity rates.

[BerenTebogo]

Fuck me, I don't know the exact goddamn installation percentages off the top of my head, do you?
But whenever I hear people complaining about the cost of winter heating in the news, they are specifically mentioning fuel prices, not electricity rates.

For individual families this may be true. I don't know the numbers either but I do know that in areas I have lived or been tangential to much of the newer "section 8" housing that was being developed was being done with electric heating and cooling in mind.

Mind you this only applies to developments in the past decade or so, but it is something that matters

Edit: also for newer developments for elderly housing. Pretty much most newer "complex" housing systems are moving towards this, as far as I have seen.

[Salodin]

Is there really a problem with families freezing to death in America? I know heating is an issue in certain states, but I've never heard of it being such a problem that "families are freezing to death".

At least, not in a way that would make you want to vote in a President that's more nuclear friendly vs some one that, you know, actively tries to give the lower and middle class more income that they can use to purchase the energy we have access to right now.

[Jaybar]

While electricity is used to power the air handling units, the heat is generated through natural gas in the home. So nuclear power won't make people not freeze in the winter. More efficiency in HVAC design and passive heating/cooling methods for buildings would be a much better first step towards energy reduction and thus energy independence from coal/oil. We need to reduce our need and demand on conditioning instead of simply increasing our energy input.

[BerenTebogo]

Is there really a problem with families freezing to death in America? I know heating is an issue in certain states, but I've never heard of it being such a problem that "families are freezing to death" like Sather is suggesting.

At least, not in a way that would make you want to vote in a President that's more nuclear friendly vs some one that, you know, actively tries to give the lower and middle class more income that they can use to purchase the energy we have access to right now.

It is a problem. Not on the scale of tens of thousands, but when you live in areas where it can happen it is a pretty stark reality.

I posted CDC numbers on the past page. Ends up being only a few hundred people a year, which isn't "headline worthy". But in my mind it is a tangible symptom of a problem that everyone views as abstract or of convenience.

It isn't that to me, as I grew up in Massachusetts and knew people whose parents couldn't afford to run the heat all through the winter. Sure, they may not have died, but I view that on the same level of problem as someone being in pain from MS. It becomes a "how much pain does someone need to be in before it matters" problem.

Edit: in response to Jaybar: also a reality for a lot of families who can't afford gas heating is to use electrical heating units for a single or for a few rooms

[Salodin]

That's nice, but this is the election thread. If we're going to talk about which candidate will be more aggressive in tackling the kinds of problems you are describing, Bernie is the best choice. Plus his views and stances have changed before, and there's no reason to think they wouldn't on nuclear energy. Not that I'm saying they have to, but if your point of contention is "we have people who can't afford this dirty energy", the immediate solution isn't to build reactors a decade out. We need a President who will fight for the interests of the very people you're describing, and putting more money in their pockets will keep them warm in the winter and grow the economy in other areas.

[archibaldcrane]

God I step out for a couple hours and this becomes a mess.

Nuclear isn't clearly cheaper than natural gas or coal, so the "nuclear helps people afford heating and cooling" argument is...strange.

Coal (and to a much lesser extent natural gas) power kill people with air pollution. If you want to make a "the poor suffer" argument start there.

Also I'm pretty sure that lack of air conditioning in heat waves is much more dangerous for poor (old) people than people freezing in their homes.

[BerenTebogo]

That's nice, but this is the election thread. If we're going to talk about which candidate will be more aggressive in tackling the kinds of problems you are describing, Bernie is the best choice. Plus his views and stances have changed before, and there's no reason to think they wouldn't on nuclear energy. Not that I'm saying they have to, but if your point of contention is "we have people who can't afford this dirty energy", the immediate solution isn't to build reactors a decade out. We need a President who will fight for the interests of the very people you're describing.

I see you didn't read back to where this started.

Dude shut down a nuclear reactor in his home state. It's not an abstract "will he? Wont he?" It was a discussion that stemmed from him doing a direct action that he had control over which is objectively the wrong one.

I agree we shouldn't continue to derail. I think NB and I came to an amicable middle ground posts ago. Jailing people for weed is wrong, the medical benefits of weed do not extend as far as he claimed.

[BerenTebogo]

God I step out for a couple hours and this becomes a mess.

Nuclear isn't clearly cheaper than natural gas or coal, so the "nuclear helps people afford heating and cooling" argument is...strange.

Coal (and to a much lesser extent natural gas) power kill people with air pollution. If you want to make a "the poor suffer" argument start there.

Also I'm pretty sure that lack of air conditioning in heat waves is much more dangerous for poor (old) people than people freezing in their homes.

Actually the CDC numbers (see previous page) had cold winning out with increased age.

I had the same thought tbh.

[archibaldcrane]

But this all sprung from climate change, and there's little ambiguity there. Being anti-nuclear is not a "I care about climate change" position.

[archibaldcrane]

For that matter, being anti-fracking is a crappy position for people who care about climate change. Cheap gas is killing coal, and killing coal is by far the most important thing to do.

[BerenTebogo]

For that matter, being anti-fracking is a crappy position for people who care about climate change. Cheap gas is killing coal, and killing coal is by far the most important thing to do.

I actually don't have any strong opinions about fracking. But admittedly I have never gone out of my way to look into it.

I guess with increasing irony as I work in a building 50ft from the geology department which may as well have a large SHELL sign sticking out of it and receive about 2-3 emails a month about internships or postdocs with Shell.

[archibaldcrane]

I simply don't know enough about the local environmental concerns in areas where fracking is occurring to have much of an opinion (although my spidey-sense is that the "issues" are overblown) but specifically in regards to climate change its a no-brainer.

[notorious bum]

Fracking is a net-negative source of fuel, nearly all of the wells operate at a loss, even if you ignore contamination of land, air, water, or increase in seismic activity.

There's a thread in here where you can find more information or you could check out Gasland films.

[Ksandra]

Honestly, any activity that is poisoning people's water systems is an action we should be stopping.

[archibaldcrane]

Fracking is a net-negative source of fuel, nearly all of the wells operate at a loss, even if you ignore contamination of land, air, water, or ease in seismic activity.

There's a thread in here where you can find more information or you could check out Gasland films.

I'm talking about natural gas fracking, not for shale oil (your link). That's a whole other issue.

[Cantih]

There is one thing I want you to think about in regards to electricity generation and climate change.
There will be three candidates in the race, traditional (coal, gas, oil), nuclear, renewable. The 400 pound gorilla in the argument is traditional, and it is going to throw it's weight around against the other two.
Which candidate is gorilla (big business/money) friendly, and which one isn't going to give a fuck what tantrum the gorilla throws?
Whatever your opinion on the other two candidates, aren't they in a better position when the gorilla is silenced?