[vcjohnson]

Grew up in the Permian basin (Odessa, UT grad as well), there really is a disconnect between larger cities and smaller towns in the state on ethos of renewables. DFW will likely be one of the first major metroplexes in the US to be powered 100% by renewables, but it won't be because the state is particularly environmentally friendly (even if DFW/Houston/Austin are). It will be because there is a vast expanse in the west side of the state to plop wind turbines and it’s cheaper than digging it out of the ground.

Not sure what point I’m trying to make here, just adding more context. Reality is that while many Texans may answer a survey asking if we should move away from fossil fuel dependence in a positive way, for most conservatives in the state I’d be surprised if it was anywhere near their chief concern when voting and would likely actively vote against it if the platform they are voting for meets their primary concerns. Thankfully, their chief concern is usually money/economy and Texas is a state that can be that can be very effective at migrating to energy alternatives in an economically beneficial way thanks to 300+ days of sunlight a year in most regions and large flat windy expanse from central Texas to Big Bend and up the padhandle.

Would just add that there is another level of complexity here. While fracking and the shale revolution do present a huge environmental problem, it’s advancement in the last 5-10 years does provide the US an extremely valuable foreign policy tool in removing the necessity of energy reliance on the Middle East whenever we want. I hope the state continues to move forward with renewables but fossil fuels, specifically in the Permian basin, is here to stay for a long time even if the state goes 100% renewable. It’s now a national security and economic priority in an age when American/Middle East relations are waning and American retrenchment from traditional allies is increasing.

[pram]

Yeah, what point are you trying to make? Texas being the biggest wind energy producer doesn't count because the citizens aren't ideologically pure enough?

[vcjohnson]

As mentioned in my comment, I realized mid-writing I didn't necessarily have point of contest to the thread OP. In retrospect, there was probably a more coherent place elsewhere in this thread to put my comment. Just providing context to what I've seen in the state and that from my subjective experience, Texan polling affinity for renewables was less related to environmental concerns and more towards economics. I'd consider this a much better vehicle for renewable adoption than ideological alignment anyway since it's significantly harder to convince people of environmental priority than it is to put more money in their pockets.