Submitted 2 years ago by iamtanmay@wolfballs.com to freeforum@wolfballs.com
https://wolfballs.com/pictrs/image/0b8b7947-04ae-4a3c-b31c-bca5701f2013.png
There's still hydro and potentially the use of burning plant based fuels, those plant based fuels are only questionably green...
And there's nuclear!
I will dissent from the typical wolfballs party line because I am to some degree an environmentalist.
Yes, yes, yes to all. Plant based fuels displace forests, so its a difficult fuel. Unless we are talking algae, but that's a really limited crop.
I think most people are environmentalists, but define it different. Conservatives are against Net Zero, because they are not convinced historical trend of 1 C warming over 50 years will continue for 100 years, and/or is a big concern, to destroy and rebuild global infrastructure. Sea level rising ? Don't build on the coast. More wildfires, droughts etc ? No convincing proof it will increase. Cheaper to not build in such areas than rejig the whole world on 100% renewable.
There are too many people, and unevenly distributed. We don't want to spread that unevenness around to the parts of the world without a problem, simply let the overpopulous parts of the world face the consequences of their decisions.
I will too, because I'm an engineer, and it's jobs and exports. There's no need to tarnish sound technology just because a few morons supporr it.
I like when they slap back with "Dumbass, we just put solar panels on everyone's roof!"
If there was enough solar radiation on a roof to heat a home in winter, then we wouldn't need to heat our homes in winter.
There are renewables that can absolutely heat millions of homes. In Canada, Quebec and Manitoba have cheap hydroelectric power such that many people have electric heat and no reason to change it. Other areas of the world could do the exact same thing, except one thing.
People want to pretend you can get industrial grade power generation without causing some unsightly environmental damage, and that's wrong. You need space, and you need material, and you need to do a lot of things just to make sure you're not dying of the cold. Once we can get over that idea we can start making decisions as to what the best choice is.
Yes, absolutely. Even "clean" Hydro has a huge impact on environment, ecosystems submerged, or dried out, relocation of settlements.
Still natural Hydro and Geo is a huge advantage. People tried to create artificial Geo power, but ran into same problems as shale, earthquakes.
renewable might be possible on combination with a major reduction in consumption and with making more efficient use of things
You could always use himans for fuel.
On non windy/solar days, output is 0. Unless the plan is to shut down on those days and huddle in the cold, renewable 100% won't work. Also in cases like a cold front that lasts a couple of weeks.
output is 0
batteries
also isn't wood renewable
Spotted_Lady@wolfballs.com 2 years ago
Well, those technologies can only partially address the heating issue. For instance, there is a low-tech way to use solar energy in the winter. You can directly recycle aluminum cans to produce a collector to assist on sunny winter days. You'd need some means to shut it off when it cannot help. And wind can still charge battery banks to produce AC from a power inverter and drive heating appliances.
I think donating solar cookers to places like Darfur is somewhat of a hack. The reason to donate those is that it reduces the need for the women to gather firewood at night when the soldiers who have turned that area into a virtual prison are most likely to commit rape. That is only a hack since really, the junta needs to be abolished.
iamtanmay@wolfballs.com 2 years ago
If you check the quote (somehow its showing up rather low res unfortunately), the German chancellor said : "100% renewable". I agree with you, renewables are excellent when mixed with traditional power like nuclear. But 100% renewables... yeah, I don't know what he is smoking.
Solar heating is brilliant for homes. Does not work for apartment buildings, and likely why it hasn't been implemented at an urban level is due to transmission loss and impracticality. Best case I know of large scale solar heating was in a remote German village where they installed a giant parabolic mirror, to catch the rare sunlight they got over a mountain that blocked most of it. As I remember, it was extremely expensive, but the only option for them.
Spotted_Lady@wolfballs.com 2 years ago
If I remember right, the huge mirror was more for psychological reasons than for energy per se. Even if you take vitamin D capsules and artificially add UV rays or even good lighting at all, there are wellness benefits to natural sunlight that you can't effectively reproduce.