Heat Pumps - How are People of modest means going to afford "clean energy?"

As Utility Bills Rise, Low-Income Americans Struggle for Access to Clean Energy

(link, no paywall)

The story speaks for itself. The U.S. is chasing its tail to solve a theoretical problem. And, in multi-story buildings heat pumps don't work too well. Trust me, the rich people at the WEF and other hoity-toity groups can afford to UBER their way around. "Saving the earth" is being done on the backs of the lower middle class and poor.

 

Electric heat pumps are not that great once temperature drop down into the tens or single digits. I have a gas furnace. It does fine regardless. I have heard that there are hybrid systems but they can be kind of pricey.

The bigger issue is energy poverty, and yes, all this "clean energy" stuff is worsening the situation for people with low incomes. Normally the market sorts it out over time by making things more affordable. They are really turning that on its head trying to force outcomes.

 

I run in place to keep warm and use less energy.

 

I've also seen some stories a few years back that indicated that they don't do well in really cold climes either

 

All very true, but not relevant to the agenda.

 

So, you're argument is that we shouldn't save the earth?

Gee, thanks a lot.

Nothin' like losing the earth, then you won't be able to post here, anymore, and from the looks of it, you haven't been posting much for the last 15 years, anyway.

 

First it started with saving the whales, then the dolphins, various fish, an owl, a lizard, the rain forest, and all sorts of stuff. Now that the left is saying the planet is going to die, where do they go from there, is the solar system next?

As for high energy bills, the government plays a huge role in how expensive they are. Maybe if the government did away with some of the regulations, fees and taxes all the way from the producer to the end user those bills would go down. It was Biden who raised the royalty fees for drilling oil by 50%. Why would he do that because it obviously negatively impacts low income, marginalized and underrepresented people the most? And things are about to get worse in the Baltimore area as Biden is preparing to shut down a coal plant with no suitable replacement that's up to the task. We did it Joe!

 

That's true. It's also true that climate change hurts the poor the most. Double whammy.

 

I'm not understanding. Your post appears contradictory. Is energy becoming expensive or not? Or what's "theoretical" about that?

The article says it is becoming more expensive. And that the US is trying to solve this by giving people access to clean energy. Which is LESS expensive.

I don't think you thought through what your point was going to be.

 

We do have to save the planet. Don't get into a slippery slope logical fallacy.

Sure, there's room for improvement, but that is no reason to abandon the planet.

 

Everything that hurts hurts the poor even more, so it's a meaningless point.

 

Switching to heat pumps won't save diddly squat. Do you even know what a heat pump is? It's a modified regular a/c unit that has a reversing valve that lets the a/c run in reverse. That's all it is. They are not efficient. And, as pointed out above, they absolutely suck when the weather gets down below freezing, like it is in Texas today (har har global warming yeah LOL). It's 24 degrees right now and my heat pump is running wide open to try to keep up. When it can't, it supplements electric resistance heat (heat strips in the air handler).

My electric bills when it's 100 degrees outside are LOWER than my electric bills in the mildest Texas winter.

The stupid climate religion folks want people to ditch their natural gas heating to go to heat pumps (all electric). In other words, instead of piping the natural gas directly to your home (when using a furnace), they want the natural gas pumped to an electricity generating plant/co-gen plant so as to fire the furnaces that make the electricity.....that then is sent to your home.

It's dumb.

 

For that matter neither is saving the earth which has never been threatened by climate change in its 4.5 billion.

 

Sure we should. However, getting rid of fossil fuels won't do it, and neither will establishing a global totalitarian government (or a bunch of independent totalitarian governments), and neither will forcing 95% of the populace into near poverty (but equal).

 

It's a step in the right direction, so we should take it.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

RodB said: ↑
Sure we should. However, getting rid of fossil fuels won't do it,

What makes it a step in the right direction? Why should we do it if it does no to little good and costs trillions of dollars?


and neither will establishing a global totalitarian government (or a bunch of independent totalitarian governments), and neither will forcing 95% of the populace into near poverty (but equal).

It is commonly recognized but never admitted that the only way to affect climate change on a global scale is with a global scale (or cooperating individual large countries) totalitarian government excerpting complete control over every action and though of the people, as described (behind the veil) by the WEF, the UN and others. Totalitarian governments always become despotic and drive down the masses, even if that was not what they believed at first.

 

I believe your question's premise is not accurate.

What are you talking about? No one is suggesting a totalitarian government, and what does that have to do with anything?

 

You don’t have public schemes encouraging solar?

 

A) lots of research showing that a massive global reduction in fossil fuel use will stabilise the climate
B) will eventually save money as green energy is now cheaper
C) stop listening to outlets that get large amounts of money from fossil fuel industries
D) read the IPCC - it is all in there

 

It is supposed to be in the low teens here the next few days and not much above freezing as highs. People with all electrical heat are going to crying a river when utility bills come out. The last time that happened for about ten days I heard people talking about how their electric bills nearly doubled that month. Mine went up like 15-20 bucks.

 

How and when will we know if these disruptive policies actually work?

 

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/

If you only want the summary

https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/chapter/summary-for-policymakers/

 

Of course no one is suggesting a totalitarian government. In fact very few of the proponents want such. The irony is that it is impossible to get global climate change effected without a totalitarian government, and totalitarian governments always morph into despotism even if that is not their initial claim or belief. This makes the cure much worse than the disease, especially since the disease is way overblown and likely misdiagnosed.

 

Since they are speculative and at best a SWAG we won't know until after the fact. And when we find they don't work everyone will say it seemed like a good idea at the time...... sorry about that overturning the entire economy.

 

• A) The research that shows eliminating fossil fuels will alter the climate is a SWAG at best and speculative at worse. Plus there is a fair amount of research that shows it won't help. Not as much to be sure, but climate science is not a democratic process.
• B) the experience to date and solid economic analyses show the opposite is true.
• C) why on earth should I do that? Only religions say that you should never listen to the opposing side.
• D) By IPCC do you mean the arm of the group (UN) striving to become a totalitarian world government?