[modfodder]

As an Okie (now living in NY), the last two are very accurate. Can't say I've heard much on 1) but polite or quiet racism is definitely prominent. The state hates Obama, hates renewable energy (even though it could be a leader in both wind and solar energy), and hates rational thinking.

If you're not a church goer or conservative, imho, it's not an enjoyable place. You will be outnumbered 90-1. And once you've lived in a community that has a vibrant artistic community (that you partake in), it becomes very difficult to enjoy a city that just doesn't respect that (and doesn't feed that part of your life).

And I say this as someone who loves Oklahoma. But it's problems far outweigh the positives for me to ever move back. I'll take NY or LA along with the expense over a cheaper growing "town".

<edit> And having lived thru the oil bust in the 80s, and how much OKC is married to the wealth and growth of Devon, Chesapeake and the oil/gas industry, another bust or even long periods of negative growth will kill the OK economy. The state leaders won't have the will to counteract that force with investments in tech and renewable energy.

[rybosome]

> The state...hates renewable energy

Well that clinches it for me. There are very, very few viewpoints that I dismiss out of hand, but opposition to renewable energy is one of them (maybe the only one). Energy is one of the world's most important resources, and we know that we are using a source which is ultimately finite. Even if oil reserves were to last another 10,000 years (and the vast majority of experts do not think this is the case), what do we have to lose by moving our infrastructure towards a renewable source? Not doing so is cutting off the branch we are sitting on.

I can tolerate people who are apathetic about this issue...I understand the greed of people who enter the oil industry without regard for the environment...I can sympathize with people who say they're concerned with personal expense (e.g. buying solar panels for their house)...but being flat-out opposed to the idea of removing humanity's dependence upon a limited resource is just ludicrous. Or willfully ignorant. Or something. I don't even know.

[ams6110]

Opportunity cost. If you expend resources on developing something what are you giving up? This is why renewables are not being developed more than they are. In fact they are probably being developed at an artificially exaggerated rate right now, given incentives such as tax credits.

[rybosome]

As oil becomes more scarce, its price will rise sharply. A large increase in the price of oil would have significant negative effects on the global economy. It can be argued that money spent to reduce our dependence on oil is only "giving up" in the same sense that saving money is giving up the ability to spend it. The opportunity cost of not pursuing alternatives is _much_ higher in the long run.

Do you actually believe that alternative energy is not a good investment, or were you attempting to rationalize why one might be opposed?

[lotharbot]

I don't hate renewable energy. I love the idea of renewable energy. But I hate parts of the renewable energy industry that lie, manipulate, or simply use political contacts to make a profit when they don't have a viable product.

I suspect Oklahoma's "hate" for renewable energy is the same. They're actually top 10 in non-hydro renewable electricity production (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_electric... ). From what I can tell, they actually have one of the healthier outlooks toward both renewable and non-renewable energy.

[mturmon]

Oklahoma is one of the reddest states in the nation. Oklahoma has voted for the Republican candidate in every election since 1952, with the exception of 1964 (Goldwater/LBJ). It's an important data point, and you will see it reflected in many peoples' attitudes. (I have family there and visit every couple of years.)