Myths/there are no sustainable energy sources/impact - Revision history

Woozle: Woozle moved page Myths/There are no sustainable energy sources/impact to Myths/there are no sustainable energy sources/impact without leaving a redirect: consistency with other myth names

2015-07-01T23:02:36Z

Woozle moved page Myths/There are no sustainable energy sources/impact to Myths/there are no sustainable energy sources/impact without leaving a redirect: consistency with other myth names

Woozle at 23:01, 1 July 2015

2015-07-01T23:01:10Z

Woozle: 1 revision

2015-07-01T22:27:05Z

1 revision

Woozle: Created page with " {{subpage}} ==About== Sustainable energy is sometimes derided because it still has "impacts"; it isn't perfectly "clean". This argument is a straw man ..."

2014-05-03T23:01:50Z

Created page with "<hide> {{subpage}} </hide> ==About== Sustainable energy is sometimes derided because it still has "impacts"; it isn't perfectly "clean". This argument is a straw man ..."

New page

<hide>
{{subpage}}
</hide>
==About==
[[Sustainable energy]] is sometimes derided because it still has "impacts"; it isn't perfectly "clean".

This argument is a [[straw man]] (nobody is claiming that it is perfectly clean), a mis-[[interpretive framing|framing]] of the issue as being about "cleanness" rather than [[sustainability]], and [[moving the goalposts]] to infinity (there is no human activity that is ''perfectly'' clean, that has ''no'' environmental impacts).

It is true on the face of it, of course -- any method of energy generation is going to have some impact if multiplied by the energy needs of enough people -- but some methods have [[../consumption|far less impact]] than others.
==Links==
{{links/smw}}

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-<hide>
+==Myth==
-{{subpage}}
+The "impact" argument against sustainable energy points out that it has environmental impacts and isn't perfectly "clean". (Note: this claim should probably be reclassified as [[irrelevancies|irrelevant]].)
-</hide>
+==Reality==
-==About==
+This argument is a {{l/ip|straw man}} (nobody is claiming that it is perfectly clean), a mis-[[issuepedia:interpretive framing|framing]] of the issue as being about "cleanness" rather than {{l/ip|sustainability}}, and {{l/ip|moving the goalposts}} to infinity (there is no human activity that is ''perfectly'' clean, that has ''no'' environmental impacts; we will ''always'' need to clean up after ourselves).
-This argument is a [[straw man]] (nobody is claiming that it is perfectly clean), a mis-[[interpretive framing|framing]] of the issue as being about "cleanness" rather than [[sustainability]], and [[moving the goalposts]] to infinity (there is no human activity that is ''perfectly'' clean, that has ''no'' environmental impacts).
+It is ''technically'' true, of course &ndash; any method of energy generation is going to have some impact if multiplied by the energy needs of enough people &ndash; but some methods have [[../consumption|far less impact]] than others.

← Older revision	Revision as of 23:02, 1 July 2015
(No difference)

← Older revision	Revision as of 22:27, 1 July 2015
(No difference)