Why would we buy all of PSE's natural gas infrastructure only to retire it? That's a huge cost Seattle would eat buy transitioning to a PUD, as Houston suggests. Seems like it would make a lot more sense to pass fees, incentives, and regulations that drive gas out of existing buildings over the next decade or so. Let PSE deal with all their old infrastructure.
We need a specific, achievable climate plan. Not pie in the sky or vague promises with no timeline. I like Jessyn on this issue.
Where is all this electricity going to come from if we can natural gas? We already have increased demand for electric cars which will grow when gas cars are banned and now all housing plus all the new housing that needs to be built will be electrified? Hydro is not great because of fish, coal is obviously out. Wind/solar will be hugely expensive and prob still not produce enough. All these plans sound like is a massive spike in energy prices coupled with rolling blackouts due to over demand on the grid. Whatâs the point of saving ourselves if the solution is worse than the problem?
Arists are green jobs? I love art, support it, it has supported me, but this statement is a little silly. Ex)An artist who creates, massive temporary sculptures made out of polystyrene, designed to be blown away in the wind. I made that up, but plenty of artists are considered avant garde or subversive, out of which some might have a completely nihilistic view about the planet that has nothing to do with saving it in practice or method.
Durkan is much too conservative and procedural to effect any real progressive change on climate and homelessness, so as a remedy we must vote for someone who is a creative problem-solver and unafraid to upset the apple cart like Nikkita Oliver or perhaps push Kshama Sawant into the ring. Let us defund the police, build housing for the homeless and clean-up the streets and parks of our fair city. Also, the maintenance staff needs to remove all the abandoned space junk we see lying about Seattle--derelict light posts and bolts sticking up out of the sidewalk for example, which are an eyesore and present a safety hazard. Pollysexual is keeping these postings short and sweet so some Dodo bird on Capitol Hill doesn't choke on their gluten-free muffin and pour hot coffee with flaxseed milk on their nuts.
Harrell is a member of the Republican Party, and he will never propose solutions that put the rich or corporations on the defensive. They fund him. PSE serves most of Western Washington; it could be turned into a publicly-owned utility and that may be a very good idea, but it doesnât really have anything to do with Seattle. The whole natural gas-in-buildings thing is a neoliberal wet dream. Homes, residences, just donât use that much natural gas, but like plastic recycling, it makes folks feel like they are doing something to hug the plant, and with similar results. You know who uses natural gas in Seattle? The steel plant, breweries, distilleries, and other commercial users who burn literal tons of gas every day. But yeah, letâs get rid of gas stoves that use negligible amounts of gas. Funny thing; some gas utilities have supported or kept quiet about residential gas prohibition, knowing that it will assuage the greens while they make bank selling natural gas to commercial and industrial users. And what is the biggest abuse of CO2 in Seattle? The concrete used to build high rises and new construction. Far, far exceeds both natural gas in residences and even transportation.
Why would we buy all of PSE's natural gas infrastructure only to retire it? That's a huge cost Seattle would eat buy transitioning to a PUD, as Houston suggests. Seems like it would make a lot more sense to pass fees, incentives, and regulations that drive gas out of existing buildings over the next decade or so. Let PSE deal with all their old infrastructure.
We need a specific, achievable climate plan. Not pie in the sky or vague promises with no timeline. I like Jessyn on this issue.
Where is all this electricity going to come from if we can natural gas? We already have increased demand for electric cars which will grow when gas cars are banned and now all housing plus all the new housing that needs to be built will be electrified? Hydro is not great because of fish, coal is obviously out. Wind/solar will be hugely expensive and prob still not produce enough. All these plans sound like is a massive spike in energy prices coupled with rolling blackouts due to over demand on the grid. Whatâs the point of saving ourselves if the solution is worse than the problem?
Arists are green jobs? I love art, support it, it has supported me, but this statement is a little silly. Ex)An artist who creates, massive temporary sculptures made out of polystyrene, designed to be blown away in the wind. I made that up, but plenty of artists are considered avant garde or subversive, out of which some might have a completely nihilistic view about the planet that has nothing to do with saving it in practice or method.
Durkan is much too conservative and procedural to effect any real progressive change on climate and homelessness, so as a remedy we must vote for someone who is a creative problem-solver and unafraid to upset the apple cart like Nikkita Oliver or perhaps push Kshama Sawant into the ring. Let us defund the police, build housing for the homeless and clean-up the streets and parks of our fair city. Also, the maintenance staff needs to remove all the abandoned space junk we see lying about Seattle--derelict light posts and bolts sticking up out of the sidewalk for example, which are an eyesore and present a safety hazard. Pollysexual is keeping these postings short and sweet so some Dodo bird on Capitol Hill doesn't choke on their gluten-free muffin and pour hot coffee with flaxseed milk on their nuts.
Harrell is a member of the Republican Party, and he will never propose solutions that put the rich or corporations on the defensive. They fund him. PSE serves most of Western Washington; it could be turned into a publicly-owned utility and that may be a very good idea, but it doesnât really have anything to do with Seattle. The whole natural gas-in-buildings thing is a neoliberal wet dream. Homes, residences, just donât use that much natural gas, but like plastic recycling, it makes folks feel like they are doing something to hug the plant, and with similar results. You know who uses natural gas in Seattle? The steel plant, breweries, distilleries, and other commercial users who burn literal tons of gas every day. But yeah, letâs get rid of gas stoves that use negligible amounts of gas. Funny thing; some gas utilities have supported or kept quiet about residential gas prohibition, knowing that it will assuage the greens while they make bank selling natural gas to commercial and industrial users. And what is the biggest abuse of CO2 in Seattle? The concrete used to build high rises and new construction. Far, far exceeds both natural gas in residences and even transportation.
@10 No, no. I'm too backwards to accept what's patently obvious to this crowd. I like children, even of my own kind.
@12 They got me at @9. Take care. These people are ruthless.
And in the scheme of things does it matter one bit? No