Page 2 of 3

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 2:20 am
by Australian rePublic
Valentine Z wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:No the problem that we're having is that we have enough for ourselves AND for everyone else combined, and we can easily have enough for us AND for overseas without having to choose, but the environmentalists are metaphorically telling us to go f%%k ourselves. (The environmentalists don't want us to export either)


So from what I understand, you guys have the resources, AND you guys are not exporting it too much, right? Just that the environmentalists are not allowing you all to use it?

Sorry if I took a while to understand. :/

Nope. We have the resources and we are exporting them. We don't have the resources to use, too, but the environmentalists are not letting us use them

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 2:28 am
by Valentine Z
Australian rePublic wrote:
Valentine Z wrote:
So from what I understand, you guys have the resources, AND you guys are not exporting it too much, right? Just that the environmentalists are not allowing you all to use it?

Sorry if I took a while to understand. :/

Nope. We have the resources and we are exporting them. We don't have (do have?) the resources to use, too, but the environmentalists are not letting us use them


Ah, I see. I think I will see what I can do. It has to be just one option on this validity, because Mining Industry and Eco-Friendliness being higher-up are kinda rare.

Err, do you mean we have the resources?

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 5:23 am
by Australian rePublic
Valentine Z wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:Nope. We have the resources and we are exporting them. We don't have (do have?) the resources to use, too, but the environmentalists are not letting us use them


Ah, I see. I think I will see what I can do. It has to be just one option on this validity, because Mining Industry and Eco-Friendliness being higher-up are kinda rare.

Err, do you mean we have the resources?

Yes I do mean we do have the resources. Sorry for the typo. Anyway, I think you should also mention cold climates as snow can't melt

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:14 am
by Valentine Z
Australian rePublic wrote:
Valentine Z wrote:
Ah, I see. I think I will see what I can do. It has to be just one option on this validity, because Mining Industry and Eco-Friendliness being higher-up are kinda rare.

Err, do you mean we have the resources?

Yes I do mean we do have the resources. Sorry for the typo. Anyway, I think you should also mention cold climates as snow can't melt


I'm thinking about it... I have a gut feeling that if I write it like it is, it will feel something out of Issue 69 (Power Problems Need Brighter Solutions), where the issue there also says about a major blackout. But the difference for mine is that the blackout is not because of the failing power plants, but rather because the fuel that it needs is not going into it.

I am not certain on which angle should I go about this, because it's not exactly that they are not allowed to use it, but because the premise of the idea is that we can use the fossil fuels, but just that we are exporting too much than we need.

I might put the option on hold, on the account that I am getting a tad confused with the validity marks and how to get around them. :?

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 2:02 am
by Candlewhisper Archive
Happily, validities are something for editors to worry about.

The core premise of excessive exporting of power causing domestic shortages is an interesting one, though it could be clearer from the opening description that that is what we're talking about.

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 2:07 am
by Valentine Z
Candlewhisper Archive wrote:Happily, validities are something for editors to worry about.

The core premise of excessive exporting of power causing domestic shortages is an interesting one, though it could be clearer from the opening description that that is what we're talking about.


Cool, thanks! I'll see what I can do.

Other than the clearer description, anything else that you would like me to do? I think I'll also kick out the computers are not banned validity, because it doesn't make sense here.

PostPosted: Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:14 pm
by Valentine Z
Bump this, with the New Draft V!

If there are no violent objections, I think I'll go ahead with submitting it.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2018 5:10 am
by Valentine Z
Bumping this again, and this time, I changed Option 3 so that it doesn't make the Mining Industry necessary, and instead talking about more production and effectively handing over the oil rigs to the companies. In other words, no more siphoning and embezzlement and instead whatever oil the rigs get, all goes to the companies.

Sort of like a Corporate State, if you will.

Anyway, I hope I get some feedback over this, and probably will be submitting it soon!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2018 10:07 am
by Valentine Z
Submitted!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2018 10:07 am
by Jutsa
Good luck, Valentine :D

PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2018 10:08 am
by Valentine Z
Jutsa wrote:Good luck, Valentine :D


Thank you! Here's to hoping that this one will do well! :blush:

PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2018 10:31 am
by Australian rePublic
Good Luck!

PostPosted: Mon Oct 29, 2018 10:53 am
by Valentine Z
Australian rePublic wrote:Good Luck!


Thanks! :P

PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 4:20 am
by Valentine Z
A bump to an old thread, but I was wondering if this was still being edited, or rejected? I know rejection doesn't have a notification, but I was wondering if I could ask on the status of it. :blush:

PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:23 am
by Candlewhisper Archive
We don't normally answer these queries, but I think circumstances allow an exception here.

As you're aware, it was picked up by one of the less active editors who started work on it back in December. Now it's in limbo, as while said editor remains very active on NS, they've been on an extended break from the editing room.

There's no obligation on any editor to work at any pace, of course, and professional courtesy prevents any of the rest of us taking over or declaring the edit halted. So for now the issue will have to sit on hiatus.

PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 8:20 am
by Valentine Z
Candlewhisper Archive wrote:We don't normally answer these queries, but I think circumstances allow an exception here.

As you're aware, it was picked up by one of the less active editors who started work on it back in December. Now it's in limbo, as while said editor remains very active on NS, they've been on an extended break from the editing room.

There's no obligation on any editor to work at any pace, of course, and professional courtesy prevents any of the rest of us taking over or declaring the edit halted. So for now the issue will have to sit on hiatus.

Ahh, sure thing. Thanks for the response, and no worries, I can wait!

I just wish the editor all the best, of course! ^^ I hope they have been doing fine!

PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:08 am
by Australian rePublic
Good Luck!

PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:10 am
by Sanctaria
Australian rePublic wrote:Good Luck!

Aussie, read the threads before you post in them for goodness sake, otherwise it's spammy.

You already wished good luck in October 2018, firstly, and secondly this is Val coming back to get an update.

Australian rePublic wrote:Good Luck!


Your good luck post is still on this page, like 4/5 posts up!

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:46 am
by Valentine Z
Candlewhisper Archive wrote:We don't normally answer these queries, but I think circumstances allow an exception here.

As you're aware, it was picked up by one of the less active editors who started work on it back in December. Now it's in limbo, as while said editor remains very active on NS, they've been on an extended break from the editing room.

There's no obligation on any editor to work at any pace, of course, and professional courtesy prevents any of the rest of us taking over or declaring the edit halted. So for now the issue will have to sit on hiatus.

I'm sorry to bug you regarding this, but I was wondering if this is still in its limbo state? I would like to resubmit it if I am given the green light to do so, but I would also like to do a few edits and maybe make a new draft on this thread if that is okay.

I would have abandoned it, but I also really love this one, because of the way RL Burma works regarding natural resources.

Thank you very much! ♥

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2021 2:33 am
by Australian rePublic
Good Luck!

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2021 4:57 am
by Valentine Z
Australian rePublic wrote:Good Luck!

Oh no, I have not resubmitted it. It was done long ago, I am just inquiring as to whether or not should I resubmit as a new draft, or something.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:09 am
by Electrum
Go ahead and re open this one :)

As it turns out, I have worked in the energy space before, so happy to prod around once you've redrafted.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:23 am
by Honeydewistania
Sanctaria wrote:
Australian rePublic wrote:Good Luck!

Aussie, read the threads before you post in them for goodness sake, otherwise it's spammy.

You already wished good luck in October 2018, firstly, and secondly this is Val coming back to get an update.

Australian rePublic wrote:Good Luck!


Your good luck post is still on this page, like 4/5 posts up!
Australian rePublic wrote:Good Luck!

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:40 am
by Valentine Z
Electrum wrote:Go ahead and re open this one :)

As it turns out, I have worked in the energy space before, so happy to prod around once you've redrafted.

Awesome, thanks! I will change it to DRAFT because I want to do a few touches. :3

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2021 6:16 am
by Trotterdam
Electrum wrote:As it turns out, I have worked in the energy space before, so happy to prod around once you've redrafted.
It's not exclusively a problem with energy. My dead-tree atlas (which was printed before the collapse of the Soviet Union - I have loose errata pages for that - so it's a bit out of date), on page 175, has a map which codes countries into four colors according to whether they have enough food to feed their citizens and whether they import more than they export or not, and a surprising number of countries are listed with the "land with insufficient food and nonetheless net export of food" caption.

Not that I'm suggesting this needs to be worked into the issue, because that would just result in lacking focus, but it's pretty shocking how many countries are selling food to the rest of the world even as their citizens starve to death.

Now onto matters that actually pertain to energy:

Valentine Z wrote:All those corporations like Seashell
This is literally just the name of the real company with an extra syllable tacked on. Maybe try something like "Conch" for an allusion that has some creativity to it.

Valentine Z wrote:[option 4] "This all got me thinking, why haven’t we switched to clean energy yet?" wonders @@RANDOMFIRSTNAME@@ Starlight, who navigated through your office with a bright and white dynamo-operated torchlight, "Why do we have to rely so much on this polluting source of energy when there are other alternatives like solar, wind, geothermal… need I go on? So many options out there that would make these depleting resources obsolete. Bring on the solarpunk!" She then stopped operating the torchlight and cracked her knuckles.
[validity] Only for Low Eco-Friendliness and/or having no Alternative Energy.
[effect] @@CAPITAL@@ has been declared off-limits for planes due to the towering windmills
Worth noting is that natural gas is actually the least-polluting fossil fuel. Relatively speaking, of course (renewables and nuclear are still less polluting), but it's significantly better than oil or coal.

Valentine Z wrote:[option 5] "Actually, I got another idea," intervenes @@RANDOMNAME5@@, a citizen who owns his own generator, "If we can no longer rely on the government to provide the energy, why don’t we provide our own? These big generators are all the rage in my neighbourhood. Sure, there were some noise and air pollution complaints for using these diesel-guzzlers, but neighbours quickly shut up when I hook up their homes to my Giver of Power. I think you should give up on a power plant, and instead install a generator for every home. Say it with me: I GOT THE POWER!"
[effect] the household with a generator is the head of a neighbourhood
This doesn't really solve the problem under discussion. Whether you're using central power plants or home generators, they still need fuel. If anything, small generators are probably less fuel-efficient due to economies of scale. (If they were more fuel-efficient, power plants would be built out of thousands of small generators stacked together.) If the government with taxpayer money can't afford to pay enough to be a more appealing customer for the gas companies than foreign buyers, then average citizens certainly can't.

I guess this solution would be best for the richest citizens of the nation, who can reasonably afford to keep their personal generators running perpetually so they aren't affected by the blackouts that keep happening on the public grid. However, the poorer citizens would definitely lose out from such an arrangement, becoming increasingly marginalized as the wealthy isolate themselves from the rest of the population's problems.

I guess the option could still work as the hyper-capitalist answer, but you'd need to change it around to more properly represent the impact (and probably change it around to endorse generators in some other way than "the government gives everyone free generators", since that's not very capitalist - maybe just shut down the public power grid entirely so citizens' choices are to either get their own generators or make do without electricity).

Actually, I think that, done properly, this would probably be a better hyper-capitalist option than the current "okay yeah, this situation is stupid, but we're bribing you to ignore it" option.