Waryle

@Waryle@jlai.lu

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨A fossil-fuel plant seeing nuclear coming...⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Solar is the main source of interest, since it’s gotten so cheap. And solar is fundamentally a thin slice of silicon […] In sum solar has no problematic elements, and the amounts involved are minor on the scale of large construction projects.

  Solar needs silver, tellurium, indium, gallium, cadmium and other things. Silver is already close-ish to become scarce, tellurium and gallium are for most part a China world-wide monopoly. Rare earth elements are needed in inverters and power conversion, and lithium/cobalt/nickel are needed for batteries needed by solar to be viable without a reliable power source. All of that will be in competition with EV and other applications.

  And nope, the amounts involved are not minor if we talk about all country phasing out of both nuclear and fossil.

  The only thing relevant for pollution, oil use, cost, supply, … in the constituent resources are the batteries

  Nope. I mean as of today, and for decades to come the highly globalized production will be entirely dependent on oil. No oil: no ore mining, no manufacturing, no transportation, no installation, and therefore no wind turbines and no solar panels. And that’s before we even get to batteries and the power grid.

  So in a world where peak oil has already passed, the price of everything that relies heavily on globalization will keep rising, including solar panels and wind turbines. And let me remind you once again that we’re still only at the very beginning of solar and wind power: competition among countries hasn’t even started yet.

  So you might say that without oil, we can’t build nuclear power plants either, and that’s true. Except that with, say, 1 million liters of oil, we can generate far more megawatts through nuclear power than through solar and wind, because it requires far fewer resources and far less reliance on globalization.

  The main issue of current grid batteries is thus lithium. Which is environmentally problematic to refine, and is expensive, but is readily available and does not depend on oil to my knowledge.

  It’s entirely dependent on oil. Nothing get produced without oil, and oil will get costlier and scarce year after year.

  Also, we would need most of the entire world lithium reserve just to convert our cars from oil to electricity. Powering entire countries with batteries, which necessitate magnitudes more storage, is just science-fiction.

  And ofc there are many developments in battery tech. Lithium is not inherently necessary for all batteries, there will be alternate chemistries available not too far into the future. If you are thinking of building a nuclear plant now, then you need to consider what batteries you would need to buy in 10 years when it would be done, not which batteries are available now.

  I mean, if I seriously start building gen II nuclear reactors in parallel, I’ll have a dozen by 10-15 years, and have almost entirely decarbonated my electricity by 20-25 years with more than 50 reactors. That’s feasible, France proved back in the 70-80’s, humanity is not not dumber and less capable than then.

  But again, you can’t tell when/if you will ever find some storage technology that you can scale up to TWh for capacity, and GW worth of power input/output.

  Loosely about 0.1% of current agricultural land.

  Batteries are not up to scale and might never be, and you would need like 5 of the Europe biggest STEP to cover capacity, and 15+ for power output just for France’s needs in a windless night in winter. We’re talking about 60-70GW over 14h. And that’s assuming you somehow have enough solar and water the next day to pump all the water back in 10h, to be prepared for the next night.

  Also STEPs can’t be built anywhere, it’s highly dependent of the geography of the country. Some countries will need to rely on batteries exclusively, which again, are just plain science-fiction as of today.

  Overprovisioning

  Overprovisioning does nothing when sun is down and wind is missing over most of the continent, which will happen even more often due to climate change. Once again, just to hold a single windless night of winter in France, you’ll need close to a TWh of storage capacity, and 60-70GW of power output. And that’s without accounting for the remaining 2/3 of energy consumption that is still fossil-based and needs to be converted to electricity.

  So yeah, you need a baseline of controllable power production AKA fossils, nuclear, or hydro. Fossils are out for obvious reasons, as well as biomass which is just Germany coping for its bad energy policies, and not all countries have access to hydroelectricity. So we need nuclear in the end.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨A fossil-fuel plant seeing nuclear coming...⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  vs basically no risk with renewables

  Except for:

  • the fact that it consumes a colossal amount of resources, so if the world decides to seriously shift toward renewables, it will lead to competition for the metals and other materials needed to build them
  • the fact that it consumes a colossal amount of resources, so it takes a huge amount of oil to extract them—oil that we’re running out of
  • the fact that they require an enormous amount of space, so current NIMBY issues will increase tenfold
  • the fact that we still don’t have even the beginnings of a storage solution capable of lasting more than a few hours, and therefore a 100% solar + wind scenario is science fiction

  In comparison, nuclear has been proven to work reliably and cheaply for entire nations, its problems are political and therefore way easier and realistical to solve than the law-of-physics problem solar and wind need to solve.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨take their money and arrest those responsible⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Hydrogen will never be a viable fuel and will never save the world. It leaks like hell, has a low energy density so it needs to be either highly compressed or highly refrigerated to liquify it to be even usable for something that is moving, which needs a lot of energy and induces a lot of constraints.

  Basically, everywhere where electricity is a meaningful solution, hydrogen is just outclassed. Which leaves heavy industries and maybe cargo ships. The rest must either electrify, or just go.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨what video game deserves to be in a museum?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  What a bad take. Do you also think the Seven Samurai movie shouldn’t be in a museum because it’s not IMAX?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Ubisoft says you "cannot complain" it shut down The Crew because you never actually owned it, and you weren't "deceived" by the lack of an offline version⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  You needlessly want to punish tens of thousands of people for the acts of a few hundred. It’s cruel, pointless and very damaging, and your tirades from a high-school essay only support the shallowness and immaturity of your thinking. I won’t waste any more time on you.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Ubisoft says you "cannot complain" it shut down The Crew because you never actually owned it, and you weren't "deceived" by the lack of an offline version⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  You want to use the “throw everybody out and see what happens”, and you claim how much better things would be under your governance.

  You’re talking like a Elon Musk wanna-be, even using shitty metaphors that mask all the complexity of the problems, and the cruelty that these kinds of decisions imply.

  You want to throw 20k employees out without any consideration for the economic and personal consequences, not to mention all the other companies around who will see their business sometimes heavily impacted.

  All this to make a stupid metaphor. You’re 14 at best.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Ubisoft says you "cannot complain" it shut down The Crew because you never actually owned it, and you weren't "deceived" by the lack of an offline version⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  How old are you?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Ubisoft says you "cannot complain" it shut down The Crew because you never actually owned it, and you weren't "deceived" by the lack of an offline version⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  The workers are glad you’re not in charge of anything, punishing them for things they have no control over.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Ubisoft says you "cannot complain" it shut down The Crew because you never actually owned it, and you weren't "deceived" by the lack of an offline version⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  No, make it a entirely employee-owned company, so they can vote the execs out, sanitize the culture, and keep the thousands of worker out of unemployment

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨I don't know who needs to hear this, but DO NOT EVER expose Jellyfin to the internet⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  My Jellyfin server is behind Cloudflare with IP outside of my country banned.

  I got Crowdsec set up on Cloudflare, Traefik and Debian directly.

  I got Jellyfin up in a docker container behind Traefik, my router opens only 80 and 443 ports and direct them to Traefik.

  Jellyfin has only access to my media files which are just downloaded movies and shows hardlinked by Sonarr/Radarr from my download folder.

  It is publicly exposed to be able to watch it from anywhere, and share it to family and friends.

  So what? They might access the movies, even delete them, I don’t care, I’ll just hardlink them back or re-download them. What harm can they do that would justify locking everything down?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨How would world politics be like if the top 100 countries (in terms of military strength) all had their own nuclear arsenals?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Thanks for sharing your researches

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨How would world politics be like if the top 100 countries (in terms of military strength) all had their own nuclear arsenals?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  I live 2000km from Chernobyl

  Chernobyl is not comparable to a nuclear bomb. Chernobyl is a reactor, made to release a steadily amount of radiations for years to make electricity.

  Chernobyl irradiated a large area because the graphite that was located in the reactor core has burned, and the fumes have been carried by the wind, taking a lot of high-level activity nuclear waste hundred or thousands of kilometers away.

  A bomb is way smaller than a reactor, and is designed to release most of its energy instantly to make the biggest explosion possible. That means a short burst of radioactivity very high level of radioactivity, with a very small half-life.

  A few days after a bomb explodes, most of the radiations would have depleted.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Anon takes the horsepill⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  yes, lower even than an analogue bike, because the electric motor is more carbon efficient than human muscle power which requires eating more.

  Everytime I saw this claim, it ended up being bullshit. What’s your source?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What is the argument for making poor/working class folks shoulder the burden of taxes?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  They don’t

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What is the argument for making poor/working class folks shoulder the burden of taxes?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  That’s not brain drain. Brain drain is when high qualified people leave their country, mostly because of the lack of infrastructures costing them opportunities for studying or working in their respective field.

  What you’re talking about is capital flight. This is an issue that is systematically raised as a counter-argument by liberals in debates on taxation. The problem is that it is seriously overestimated:

  • Leaving a country is a lot more complicated than it sounds: you lose your family, your friends, your culture, your habits. Many millionaires who leave their country end up coming back after a few years.
  • You can’t relocate your real estate investments.
  • Going abroad doesn’t exempt you from paying taxes (especially exit taxes).
  • A country that wishes to do so can prohibit the relocation of a profitable company, or even nationalize it.
  • Many rich people who threaten to leave if taxes are raised end up doing the math: if there’s a profitable business, they’ll stay. And in a country that finances its infrastructure soundly and has a good distribution of wealth, there’s profitable business to be had.
• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Pros / cons of riding a bike?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago⁩:
  • Those are tires, not wheels.
  • 35% which uses them means that 65% don’t use them.
  • You said “no matter gear you have”, so you can’t use that point.
  • With 20cm of fresh snow, even a normal car would be stuck. But if you tell me that you use a special car (a pick-up for example), I will argue that you can use a special bike (such as a fat bike) and roll with it without problem.
• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Pros / cons of riding a bike?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago⁩:

  And we could save a lot of people if they put on helmets to walk down stairs, and yet I don’t see anyone saying that people are stupid not to wear them.

  And your friend, if he drives at 30mph, of course he has to wear a helmet, but the subject is not a sporty practice of cycling, but bike commuting. And helmets does not protect you from a shitty infrastructure and tank-like cars that run you over, so maybe it would be good to stop insulting people and bring some nuance to this debate.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Pros / cons of riding a bike?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago⁩:

  Guess dutch people are stupid, but at least they have way less death per kilometer while cycling ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Pros / cons of riding a bike?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago⁩:

  Finnish children cycle to school

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨An £8 sandwich in Starbucks⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago⁩:

  The most popular sandwich in France is the Jambon-Beurre, which is just butter and ham