Comments on: Reframing the energy debate, Part 1: Time to stop using the phrase “renewable energy” http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/ The Latest on Climate Science, Solutions, and Politics Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:59:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1 By: David B. Benson http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16421 David B. Benson Mon, 21 Jul 2008 19:06:41 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16421 I like BST! But if you don't like 'renewable energy', how about 'permanent energy'? I like BST!

But if you don’t like ‘renewable energy’, how about ‘permanent energy’?

]]> By: Brewster http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16423 Brewster Mon, 21 Jul 2008 19:21:30 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16423 I like "Permanent Energy" It might make people sit up and take notice! I like “Permanent Energy”

It might make people sit up and take notice!

]]> By: Jeff Green http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16426 Jeff Green Mon, 21 Jul 2008 19:31:29 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16426 Infinite Solar and Wind. Multigenerational Solar and wind. National Security Solar and wind. Never ending solar and wind. Abundant solar and wind. Secure Solar and wind Insecure oil. Economy busting oil Poor devastating oil climate hothouse oil Infinite Solar and Wind.

Multigenerational Solar and wind.

National Security Solar and wind.

Never ending solar and wind.

Abundant solar and wind.

Secure Solar and wind

Insecure oil.

Economy busting oil

Poor devastating oil

climate hothouse oil

]]> By: MattKirby http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16428 MattKirby Mon, 21 Jul 2008 19:33:42 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16428 Thought provoking article! But why does there need to be a catchy name at all? Isn't that buying into the same idea that they can all be lumped together? The day will inevitably come when 'renewable energy' is merely 'energy.' So why can't we make that day come sooner? Just start reinforcing that clean energy is the only energy that we can really have long term. And start calling everything else 'non-renewable' energy. Lump those ideas together. http://www.sierraclub.org/wildlegacy/blog/index.asp Thought provoking article! But why does there need to be a catchy name at all? Isn’t that buying into the same idea that they can all be lumped together? The day will inevitably come when ‘renewable energy’ is merely ‘energy.’ So why can’t we make that day come sooner? Just start reinforcing that clean energy is the only energy that we can really have long term. And start calling everything else ‘non-renewable’ energy. Lump those ideas together.

http://www.sierraclub.org/wildlegacy/blog/index.asp

]]> By: Karel De Brabandere http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16430 Karel De Brabandere Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:02:35 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16430 By the way, Vestas simply calls wind power, 'modern energy': http://www.vestas.com/en/modern-energy. And there absolutely right about it! By the way, Vestas simply calls wind power, ‘modern energy’: http://www.vestas.com/en/modern-energy.

And there absolutely right about it!

]]> By: Joe http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16433 Joe Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:39:34 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16433 MattKirby: Yes, very good idea. Let's call everything else non-renewable energy. David: I wasn't really looking for a different word than "renewable" -- I was just trying to get away from lumping all of renewables together. MattKirby: Yes, very good idea. Let’s call everything else non-renewable energy.

David: I wasn’t really looking for a different word than “renewable” — I was just trying to get away from lumping all of renewables together.

]]> By: BT Turner http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16435 BT Turner Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:50:53 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16435 Great post Joe, this is a great point. Giving each technology it's own "bullet" in whatever policy process or document sends and reinforces the message that each is a priority, and not an afterthought. -I think it'd be wise to keep both "solar photovoltaics" (which can often be shortened to "solar PV") and "solar thermal" for a few reasons: a) just "photovoltaics" sounds so techy you will turn off many people right away, b) most people don't know there are both technologies, so they'll think solar thermal is solar PV anyway, c) distinguishing solar thermal will cause those that don't know it to learn more -I think biomass should be in the list. Whether it's longer-term thermochemical conversion to electricity and gaseous or liquid fuel, or near-term biomass co-firing with pulverized coal, there is substantial sustainable potential in ag and forestry residues, non-cropland-grown energy crops, and urban wastes. And there's a great constituency for it. -How about "low-carbon energies" for your umbrella term? It's short, gets right to the point, people get it. Sure, it also includes nuclear and fossil generation with CCS, but so what? Great post Joe, this is a great point. Giving each technology it’s own “bullet” in whatever policy process or document sends and reinforces the message that each is a priority, and not an afterthought.

-I think it’d be wise to keep both “solar photovoltaics” (which can often be shortened to “solar PV”) and “solar thermal” for a few reasons: a) just “photovoltaics” sounds so techy you will turn off many people right away, b) most people don’t know there are both technologies, so they’ll think solar thermal is solar PV anyway, c) distinguishing solar thermal will cause those that don’t know it to learn more
-I think biomass should be in the list. Whether it’s longer-term thermochemical conversion to electricity and gaseous or liquid fuel, or near-term biomass co-firing with pulverized coal, there is substantial sustainable potential in ag and forestry residues, non-cropland-grown energy crops, and urban wastes. And there’s a great constituency for it.
-How about “low-carbon energies” for your umbrella term? It’s short, gets right to the point, people get it. Sure, it also includes nuclear and fossil generation with CCS, but so what?

]]> By: Ronald http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16436 Ronald Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:00:26 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16436 What we should be calling fossil fuels are depleatable energy. I was watching an Oil company exec. make comments at the recent Govenors conference. He made the comment about how much oil we used to pull out of the ground and now we are pulling out less, he immediately said we need more areas to drill to make up for it, the inference being that's why we are pulling less oil out of the ground. The reason we are pulling less oil out of the ground has to do with reduced oil yields, certainly in this country since 1970, but also around the world. He purposely let people think that all we need to do is drill forever and we'll be alright. But fossil fuels are depleatable. That's what is the opposite of renewable. It is depleatable Natural Gas, Oil and Coal (Tar Sands and Oil Shale) and Renewable Wind, Solar and Geothermal. What we should be calling fossil fuels are depleatable energy.

I was watching an Oil company exec. make comments at the recent Govenors conference. He made the comment about how much oil we used to pull out of the ground and now we are pulling out less, he immediately said we need more areas to drill to make up for it, the inference being that’s why we are pulling less oil out of the ground. The reason we are pulling less oil out of the ground has to do with reduced oil yields, certainly in this country since 1970, but also around the world. He purposely let people think that all we need to do is drill forever and we’ll be alright. But fossil fuels are depleatable.

That’s what is the opposite of renewable. It is depleatable Natural Gas, Oil and Coal (Tar Sands and Oil Shale) and Renewable Wind, Solar and Geothermal.

]]> By: Ronald http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16437 Ronald Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:02:23 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16437 Just to add, the Natural Gas, Oil and Coal should be depleatables and what we call Renewables should be called non-depleatables to be accurate on what they really are. Just to add, the Natural Gas, Oil and Coal should be depleatables and what we call Renewables should be called non-depleatables to be accurate on what they really are.

]]> By: Paul K http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16439 Paul K Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:26:01 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16439 How about 21st Century energy? How about 21st Century energy?

]]> By: Brooks B. http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16441 Brooks B. Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:41:17 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16441 Very important concept! Smart Energy popped into my head. Great thing is one automatically thinks of "Stupid Energy" like corn ethanol, etc. Then I googled it. Taken long ago by geothermal company. I'm not a lawyer. But it MUST be something like that. Smart energy saves the planet like an energy should. Thom Hartmann in "Cracking the Code" explains why carefully reasoned arguments don't win minds. You've got to get down to the reptilian brain instantly. Very important concept!

Smart Energy popped into my head. Great thing is one automatically thinks of “Stupid Energy” like corn ethanol, etc.

Then I googled it. Taken long ago by geothermal company. I’m not a lawyer.

But it MUST be something like that. Smart energy saves the planet like an energy should.

Thom Hartmann in “Cracking the Code” explains why carefully reasoned arguments don’t win minds. You’ve got to get down to the reptilian brain instantly.

]]> By: Joe http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16443 Joe Mon, 21 Jul 2008 22:11:18 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16443 Yes, biomass should be on the list. I was thinking about this list in terms of electricity, but biomass is equally good if not better or for that than fuels. Yes, biomass should be on the list. I was thinking about this list in terms of electricity, but biomass is equally good if not better or for that than fuels.

]]> By: paulm http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16447 paulm Mon, 21 Jul 2008 22:57:16 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16447 Sustainable Sustainable

]]> By: Peter Wood http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16452 Peter Wood Tue, 22 Jul 2008 00:31:54 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16452 Wave power may also be one to add to the list. Wave power may also be one to add to the list.

]]> By: David B. Benson http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16453 David B. Benson Tue, 22 Jul 2008 01:02:14 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16453 I like paulm's 'sustainable energy" the best, so far. Fits in with 'sustainable agriculture'. I like paulm’s ’sustainable energy” the best, so far.

Fits in with ’sustainable agriculture’.

]]> By: Paul K http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16455 Paul K Tue, 22 Jul 2008 01:20:22 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16455 Sustainable sounds a bit like subsistence. 21st Century connotes progress. Sustainable sounds a bit like subsistence. 21st Century connotes progress.

]]> By: David B. Benson http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16456 David B. Benson Tue, 22 Jul 2008 01:41:53 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16456 Paul K --- With 'progressive energy' you lose the Republican vote. :-) Sorry, but '21st century energy' just has too many syllables. Paul K — With ‘progressive energy’ you lose the Republican vote. :-)

Sorry, but ’21st century energy’ just has too many syllables.

]]> By: Joe http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16457 Joe Tue, 22 Jul 2008 02:10:21 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16457 Sorry -- sustainable energy is a nonstarter. The term is simply too devoid of meaning, and the word "sustainable" is to easily mocked or dismissed. Sorry — sustainable energy is a nonstarter. The term is simply too devoid of meaning, and the word “sustainable” is to easily mocked or dismissed.

]]> By: Paul K http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16458 Paul K Tue, 22 Jul 2008 02:12:23 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16458 David B. Benson, There have been progressive Republicans since the party was formed. We owe our national park system to progressive Republicans. We owe the Civil Rights Act to progressive Republicans. That being said, the word I used was progress which appeals to all Republicans. In fact, partly due to your syllable point, I'm changing my suggestion to Progress Energy. David B. Benson,
There have been progressive Republicans since the party was formed. We owe our national park system to progressive Republicans. We owe the Civil Rights Act to progressive Republicans. That being said, the word I used was progress which appeals to all Republicans. In fact, partly due to your syllable point, I’m changing my suggestion to Progress Energy.

]]> By: john http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16463 john Tue, 22 Jul 2008 03:23:19 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16463 Well, I like the idea of naming each type of energy -- I also think referring to fossil fuels as "depletable" or "depleting" or "rapidly depleting" resources makes some sense. Well, I like the idea of naming each type of energy — I also think referring to fossil fuels as “depletable” or “depleting” or “rapidly depleting” resources makes some sense.

]]> By: Peter Foley http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16465 Peter Foley Tue, 22 Jul 2008 04:07:24 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16465 How about the number of years until the next source is needed: 1. Fossil Oil= good for ~30 years. 2. Natural Gas= good for 50 years. 3. coal power = good for 200+years. 4. Wind Power = Good for ever 25 % of the time 5. Solar Power = Good ~ 33% time on cloud free days below the Arctic circles. 6. Nuclear power = over 1000 years with current fission tech. 7. Various types of synthetic oil/Gas= Good until we run out of fissile material or sunlight. 8. Coal, shale, or tar sands based oil = 70-100 years or more at least. I'm still waiting for Kerry's plan for Iraq, the Demo's energy plan is misery in the dark with high taxes. I can see Pelosi and Obama(is he praying 5 times a day) lips moving preying for an increase in oil prices and an economic crisis to get them Re/elected. How about the number of years until the next source is needed:
1. Fossil Oil= good for ~30 years.
2. Natural Gas= good for 50 years.
3. coal power = good for 200+years.
4. Wind Power = Good for ever 25 % of the time
5. Solar Power = Good ~ 33% time on cloud free days below the Arctic circles.
6. Nuclear power = over 1000 years with current fission tech.
7. Various types of synthetic oil/Gas= Good until we run out of fissile material or sunlight.
8. Coal, shale, or tar sands based oil = 70-100 years or more at least.

I’m still waiting for Kerry’s plan for Iraq, the Demo’s energy plan is misery in the dark with high taxes.

I can see Pelosi and Obama(is he praying 5 times a day) lips moving preying for an increase in oil prices and an economic crisis to get them Re/elected.

]]> By: John Liungman http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16484 John Liungman Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:48:52 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16484 I like Brooks´ SMART ENERGY. Remember, the debate in the US has a powerful influence on how we talk about these things in the rest of the world (like here in Sweden). "Smart" is probably not so hard to translate as many of the other suggestions. I like Brooks´ SMART ENERGY. Remember, the debate in the US has a powerful influence on how we talk about these things in the rest of the world (like here in Sweden). “Smart” is probably not so hard to translate as many of the other suggestions.

]]> By: Jason L http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16497 Jason L Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:07:59 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16497 One other semantic that matters: instead of environmentalist, use conservationalist. I come from a farm in central Nebraska and one is a cussword and the other acceptable. One other semantic that matters: instead of environmentalist, use conservationalist. I come from a farm in central Nebraska and one is a cussword and the other acceptable.

]]> By: Andy P http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16529 Andy P Tue, 22 Jul 2008 21:06:34 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16529 Peter Foley: 1. Fossil Oil = Good until the Arctic ice cap vanishes 2. Natural Gas = Good until Florida is underwater 3. Coal Power = Good until we can't breathe outdoors 6. Nuclear Power = Good until a meltdown or fissile material is "misplaced" 7. Various types of synthetic oil/Gas = Good until Canada is tropical 8. Coal, share, or tar sands based oil = Good until human activity on earth ceases Peter Foley:
1. Fossil Oil = Good until the Arctic ice cap vanishes
2. Natural Gas = Good until Florida is underwater
3. Coal Power = Good until we can’t breathe outdoors
6. Nuclear Power = Good until a meltdown or fissile material is “misplaced”
7. Various types of synthetic oil/Gas = Good until Canada is tropical
8. Coal, share, or tar sands based oil = Good until human activity on earth ceases

]]> By: David B. Benson http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16542 David B. Benson Tue, 22 Jul 2008 23:01:15 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16542 Peter Foley --- You ought to read what David Rutledge has to say about Peak Coal. Maybe as early as 2025 CE. Peter Foley — You ought to read what David Rutledge has to say about Peak Coal. Maybe as early as 2025 CE.

]]> By: John Hollenberg http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16548 John Hollenberg Wed, 23 Jul 2008 00:42:27 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16548 Here is the Peak Coal reference: http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2697 Just started reading, looks to be very interesting. Here is the Peak Coal reference:

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2697

Just started reading, looks to be very interesting.

]]> By: Brooks B. http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16551 Brooks B. Wed, 23 Jul 2008 01:44:26 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16551 Joe: I vote against "unbalanced energy policy". My mind immediately links to "mentally unbalanced" and I think "the enemy" would find a way to jump on that. In general, in my opinion FWIW, I think terms like "baseload solar thermal" are way too "scientific". The scientists are convinced, it's J Q Public we have to reach. When I read the bit on Shale Oil my first thought was "That's insane!" So, thought of: Sane Energy. Again googled and found "Sane Energy Policy" is very popular. Obama made a speech in 2005 with that in title and just organized a forum with same name. Pro Life Energy Pro Earth Energy Save the F** planet energy People get big 6 figures to do this. Let's hire one. They do pay people well into 6 figures to come up with such things. We're talking about saving the planet . Joe:
I vote against “unbalanced energy policy”. My mind immediately links to “mentally unbalanced” and I think “the enemy” would find a way to jump on that. In general, in my opinion FWIW, I think terms like “baseload solar thermal” are way too “scientific”.

The scientists are convinced, it’s J Q Public we have to reach.

When I read the bit on Shale Oil my first thought was “That’s insane!”

So, thought of: Sane Energy.

Again googled and found “Sane Energy Policy” is very popular. Obama made a speech in 2005 with that in title and just organized a forum with same name.

Pro Life Energy
Pro Earth Energy
Save the F** planet energy

People get big 6 figures to do this. Let’s hire one.

They do pay people well into 6 figures to come up with such things. We’re talking about saving the planet .

]]> By: Emma http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16555 Emma Wed, 23 Jul 2008 03:48:14 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16555 I like 'infinite' versus 'depleting'. And I love 'baseload solar thermal' - or even the term 'baseload renewables' to denote all the others apart from wind and solar PV that people never think when they hear the word 'renewable'. I like ‘infinite’ versus ‘depleting’. And I love ‘baseload solar thermal’ - or even the term ‘baseload renewables’ to denote all the others apart from wind and solar PV that people never think when they hear the word ‘renewable’.

]]> By: Trinifar http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16565 Trinifar Wed, 23 Jul 2008 07:15:00 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16565 I like your ideas, Joe, and will offer this one: safe energy. Gives you the opportunity to drive home the point that fossil fuels are not safe -- even if they were plentiful and cheap they can't be used safely. Also goes nicely with "safe climate." I like your ideas, Joe, and will offer this one: safe energy. Gives you the opportunity to drive home the point that fossil fuels are not safe — even if they were plentiful and cheap they can’t be used safely. Also goes nicely with “safe climate.”

]]> By: Craig http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16611 Craig Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:27:02 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16611 How about 'sustainable energy'. Energy sources that produce C02 are not sustainable over the long run and we should stop using them in a gradual way or else we are going to be forced to stop using them all at once. How about ’sustainable energy’. Energy sources that produce C02 are not sustainable over the long run and we should stop using them in a gradual way or else we are going to be forced to stop using them all at once.

]]> By: Jay Alt http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16643 Jay Alt Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:21:15 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2008/07/21/reframing-the-energy-debate-part-1-time-to-stop-using-the-phrase-renewable-energy/#comment-16643 As Joe points out, the phrase 'baseload solar thermal' has real benefits. It promotes a specific, promising technology and strengthens the idea of reliability. Solar output does vary with cloud cover, but it also tracks well with air conditioning demand. Ideally, the phrase becomes familiar enough that 'baseload' could be tacked onto 2nd generation 'wind power' systems. The ones that will include energy storage. 'Baseload wind power.' Wind and solar complement one another in availability and using the same term would strengthen the image of both. When countering the idea of 'intermittence' and 'unreliability' I like the terms 'periodic' or 'cyclic.' It acknowledges that energy providers will use those patterns to work clean energy systems into the grid. As Joe points out, the phrase ‘baseload solar thermal’ has real benefits. It promotes a specific, promising technology and strengthens the idea of reliability. Solar output does vary with cloud cover, but it also tracks well with air conditioning demand.

Ideally, the phrase becomes familiar enough that ‘baseload’ could be tacked onto 2nd generation ‘wind power’ systems. The ones that will include energy storage. ‘Baseload wind power.’

Wind and solar complement one another in availability and using the same term would strengthen the image of both.

When countering the idea of ‘intermittence’ and ‘unreliability’ I like the terms ‘periodic’ or ‘cyclic.’ It acknowledges that energy providers will use those patterns to work clean energy systems into the grid.

]]>