Why are all changes in environmental policies scheduled for 10+ years down the road?

[roguerower]

I was reading in the NY Times about how Alaska is pushing for a large increase in green power through wind and hydroelectric power. The state currently produces 24% of its energy through renewable sources and Palin has announced a goal of 50% by 2025.

2025?

What the hell, why is it going to take 16 fricking years to increase by 26% when the total number of residents in the state is 670,000 residents. Throw up a bunch of wind turbines real quick or here's a thought, build a nuclear power plant and there's your 26% in about 5 years (construction time, since it will take the federal government forever to allow a permit).

Why is it that when the government always sets an increase in standards, whether it's MPG in vehicles or green energy percentages, the deadline is always a full generation away?

Why can't they pull their heads out of their asses and regulate efficiently?

Rant over. Might sound a bit childish and lacking long term thought, but I read this and started banging my head against the wall.

Link to NY Times Article

 

[Merithynos]

Primarily because in 10 years the current administration will likely be out of power, which means they will have no accountability. It allows them to dole out costly consulting contracts to their buddies and supporters without ever having to actually accomplish anything, and get the positive publicity for being responsible for the initiative. It's a win/win for the politicians.

 

[sao123]

ok, well heres the deal.

Technology takes time to research, develop, then purchase, install, and perfect before you can use...

As of today, you now have to make all Coal power plants produce 20% less CO2, but maintaining the same or greeater power output as you do now.

For every day you miss this goal by, you are fined $1000.
Do you want it to start tomorrow, or 10 years from today?

 

[Flammable]

Originally posted by: sao123
ok, well heres the deal.

Technology takes time to research, develop, then purchase, install, and perfect before you can use...

As of today, you now have to make all Coal power plants produce 20% less CO2, but maintaining the same or greeater power output as you do now.

For every day you miss this goal by, you are fined $1000.
Do you want it to start tomorrow, or 10 years from today?

obviously today

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: sao123
Technology takes time to research, develop, then purchase, install, and perfect before you can use...

Surely there are technologies we've researched and developed already that could be put into use immediately. No matter how long you wait, some people won't be ready or able, as evidenced by the DTV "transition"

 

[So]

Originally posted by: roguerower
I was reading in the NY Times about how Alaska is pushing for a large increase in green power through wind and hydroelectric power. The state currently produces 24% of its energy through renewable sources and Palin has announced a goal of 50% by 2025.

2025?

What the hell, why is it going to take 16 fricking years to increase by 26% when the total number of residents in the state is 670,000 residents. Throw up a bunch of wind turbines real quick or here's a thought, build a nuclear power plant and there's your 26% in about 5 years (construction time, since it will take the federal government forever to allow a permit).

Why is it that when the government always sets an increase in standards, whether it's MPG in vehicles or green energy percentages, the deadline is always a full generation away?

Why can't they pull their heads out of their asses and regulate efficiently?

Rant over. Might sound a bit childish and lacking long term thought, but I read this and started banging my head against the wall.

Link to NY Times Article

Thanks to federal environmental permitting laws, if you want to build anything on government land (which is almost all the land in alaska), permitting alone takes about five years.

 

[sao123]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: sao123
Technology takes time to research, develop, then purchase, install, and perfect before you can use...

Surely there are technologies we've researched and developed already that could be put into use immediately. No matter how long you wait, some people won't be ready or able, as evidenced by the DTV "transition"

if the technology existed now, and was cost effective, dont you think we would be doing it already?

 

[glenn1]

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: roguerower
I was reading in the NY Times about how Alaska is pushing for a large increase in green power through wind and hydroelectric power. The state currently produces 24% of its energy through renewable sources and Palin has announced a goal of 50% by 2025.

2025?

What the hell, why is it going to take 16 fricking years to increase by 26% when the total number of residents in the state is 670,000 residents. Throw up a bunch of wind turbines real quick or here's a thought, build a nuclear power plant and there's your 26% in about 5 years (construction time, since it will take the federal government forever to allow a permit).

Why is it that when the government always sets an increase in standards, whether it's MPG in vehicles or green energy percentages, the deadline is always a full generation away?

Why can't they pull their heads out of their asses and regulate efficiently?

Rant over. Might sound a bit childish and lacking long term thought, but I read this and started banging my head against the wall.

Link to NY Times Article

Thanks to federal environmental permitting laws, if you want to build anything on government land (which is almost all the land in alaska), permitting alone takes about five years.

And then after that, it gets held up another 5-10 years due to lawsuits from environmentalist nutjobs and NIMBY residents.

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: Merithynos
Primarily because in 10 years the current administration will likely be out of power, which means they will have no accountability. It allows them to dole out costly consulting contracts to their buddies and supporters without ever having to actually accomplish anything, and get the positive publicity for being responsible for the initiative. It's a win/win for the politicians.

/thread

 

[kranky]

You get the media buzz for taking "action" without actually doing anything.

BTW, my plans for a $5,000 giveaway here when I make my 50,000th post are shaping up nicely.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Originally posted by: Merithynos
Primarily because in 10 years the current administration will likely be out of power, which means they will have no accountability. It allows them to dole out costly consulting contracts to their buddies and supporters without ever having to actually accomplish anything, and get the positive publicity for being responsible for the initiative. It's a win/win for the politicians.

This. Many countries have already developed a lot (if not all) of the technology required, but by pushing it to another administration they don't have to be bothered with it themselves.

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: Merithynos
Primarily because in 10 years the current administration will likely be out of power, which means they will have no accountability. It allows them to dole out costly consulting contracts to their buddies and supporters without ever having to actually accomplish anything, and get the positive publicity for being responsible for the initiative. It's a win/win for the politicians.

This.

It's like promising to remodel the bathroom in two years when you know you're leaving your wife next christmas.