Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OAITW r.2.0

(32,788 posts)
Wed Jun 3, 2026, 12:01 AM Yesterday

Can anyone explain why we needed to spend $3 Trillion dollars over the past 40 years, protecting SA /ME

oil delivery systems? Seems like we could have invested that money a lot better.

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Can anyone explain why we needed to spend $3 Trillion dollars over the past 40 years, protecting SA /ME (Original Post) OAITW r.2.0 Yesterday OP
Invested it better in what? Renewables, maybe... Wounded Bear Yesterday #1
Consumers are rethinking their automotive choices going forward. OAITW r.2.0 Yesterday #3
Solar 40 years ago was pathetic. Igel 20 hrs ago #4
Kick dalton99a Yesterday #2

Wounded Bear

(64,734 posts)
1. Invested it better in what? Renewables, maybe...
Wed Jun 3, 2026, 12:07 AM
Yesterday

Every oil crisis we have they sell more EVs and hybrids. 'Bout time we get over the top on those.

Went to a local Denney's for lunch today. Hadn't been there in a while. They installed about a half a dozen auto charger spots in their parking lot. All brand new, and I don't think they were active yet, but they are there.

OAITW r.2.0

(32,788 posts)
3. Consumers are rethinking their automotive choices going forward.
Wed Jun 3, 2026, 12:16 AM
Yesterday

Invest in solar panels/battery back ups and break the cycle with EV.

Igel

(37,635 posts)
4. Solar 40 years ago was pathetic.
Wed Jun 3, 2026, 10:25 AM
20 hrs ago

Wind, not much better.

For solar, a lot of the breakthroughs came from research that wouldn't have been possible 40 years ago--materials resulting from unrelated research, techniques and knowledge not being sought were needed. And even then, it was a quiet scandal maybe 5, 10 years ago that with advancements in solar tech a lot of solar panels installed 15, 20 years ago with 30-year lifetimes and carbon/energy 'green' calculations based on that life time were being replaced way early because the economics made sense--roll the existing debt over while incurring new debt with far more efficient solar panels. (Of course, the only 'green' calculations that were done were those going forward, they wrote off the 'debt' from retiring still useful but inefficient tech.)

Could have done nuclear, but that was considered evil. After 3MI the goal was to produce such a regulatory thicket against implementing then-extant technologies that a new plant would take decades to get permissions to build, with a strong bias against new technologies. And it worked splendidly.

In Germany, as they were phasing out Russian methane they were shutting down nuclear power plants as "evil" and anti-environmental, hoisting electricity rates, causing shortages so that factories had to go idle at times.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Can anyone explain why we...