The so-called energy debate boils down to discuss what energy source is best. This is as absurd as to discuss what the best means of transport. What is better the train or plane? The boat or the subway? Does the bike or car? Obviously
each mode has its advantages and disadvantages. Will be useful in some circumstances and completely useless in others. If there is a perfect means of transport or who were clearly above the rest in all circumstances ... only would use this means of transport.
Just as happens with energy sources. If there is a source of energy that was clearly above the rest in all the senses, exist only one source of energy.
If there are different sources of energy is because each is able to offer some advantage over others in some specific aspect.
Therefore it is obvious that all energy sources must have some advantages and some disadvantages.
This allows the energy debate can be extended indefinitely without ever reaching a conclusion.
Each participant chooses the power source of their preference. Generally, nuclear or renewable, although there are some unusual calls for coal. Then you just have to engage in looking for arguments to prove advantages of your favorite and disadvantages of the rest ... Just do not listen to arguments to the contrary from rivals in order to prolong the debate until the end of time.
debate this scheme as "productive" is the same as in the debates: PP or PSOE?, "Real Madrid or Barcelona?, Does Esteban or Bell?
But the question we should discuss is no energy source is better, but energy model we want and what is the most appropriate energy policy to achieve it.
The boats have many advantages, they are unbeatable when carrying large loads and even accidents like the Titanic are very striking and memorable is a very safe means of navigation ... but no hole within the transport system of the community of Madrid.
Bicycles are very useful, healthy and green ... but for the export of steel profiles ... are not valid.
We should first determine what are our objectives and priorities. Once we know what we want, then we think which is the most appropriate energy policy to achieve it. No one can act in reverse. This is explained in "Punk Energy Debate" so I will not dwell here.
Keep in mind that energy policy is based not only on choosing the most appropriate energy sources to achieve the objectives. As an example, let the goal is to get a cheap electricity to domestic consumers. What we do energy policy?
determined "which is the lowest cost energy technology? And then what?" The implant to cascoporro? How? And although consiguiéramos
increase this source of energy, there would be a very effective policy since the end consumer prices are not determined by production costs, but by a complex system of auction etc etc. Perhaps the most effective way to reduce prices to consumers would be avoiding the electrical Executed prices including changing the auction system (so to speak.)
Set targets is a much more complex than it seems, to develop a sound energy policy is something really hard for what you need to know in depth the intricate electrical system.
Choose a favorite energy source and find arguments to defend and attack the rest is very simple, fun and affordable for everyone ... no wonder that we are wasting time with this (I included ... of course)
each mode has its advantages and disadvantages. Will be useful in some circumstances and completely useless in others. If there is a perfect means of transport or who were clearly above the rest in all circumstances ... only would use this means of transport.
Just as happens with energy sources. If there is a source of energy that was clearly above the rest in all the senses, exist only one source of energy.
If there are different sources of energy is because each is able to offer some advantage over others in some specific aspect.
Therefore it is obvious that all energy sources must have some advantages and some disadvantages.
This allows the energy debate can be extended indefinitely without ever reaching a conclusion.
Each participant chooses the power source of their preference. Generally, nuclear or renewable, although there are some unusual calls for coal. Then you just have to engage in looking for arguments to prove advantages of your favorite and disadvantages of the rest ... Just do not listen to arguments to the contrary from rivals in order to prolong the debate until the end of time.
debate this scheme as "productive" is the same as in the debates: PP or PSOE?, "Real Madrid or Barcelona?, Does Esteban or Bell?
But the question we should discuss is no energy source is better, but energy model we want and what is the most appropriate energy policy to achieve it.
The boats have many advantages, they are unbeatable when carrying large loads and even accidents like the Titanic are very striking and memorable is a very safe means of navigation ... but no hole within the transport system of the community of Madrid.
Bicycles are very useful, healthy and green ... but for the export of steel profiles ... are not valid.
We should first determine what are our objectives and priorities. Once we know what we want, then we think which is the most appropriate energy policy to achieve it. No one can act in reverse. This is explained in "Punk Energy Debate" so I will not dwell here.
Keep in mind that energy policy is based not only on choosing the most appropriate energy sources to achieve the objectives. As an example, let the goal is to get a cheap electricity to domestic consumers. What we do energy policy?
determined "which is the lowest cost energy technology? And then what?" The implant to cascoporro? How? And although consiguiéramos
increase this source of energy, there would be a very effective policy since the end consumer prices are not determined by production costs, but by a complex system of auction etc etc. Perhaps the most effective way to reduce prices to consumers would be avoiding the electrical Executed prices including changing the auction system (so to speak.)
Set targets is a much more complex than it seems, to develop a sound energy policy is something really hard for what you need to know in depth the intricate electrical system.
Choose a favorite energy source and find arguments to defend and attack the rest is very simple, fun and affordable for everyone ... no wonder that we are wasting time with this (I included ... of course)
0 comments:
Post a Comment