• Forester@yiffit.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Solar, wind, geothermal and biofuels

    Aka renewables

    So while the progress of the last few decades in renewables is great progress, I’m certain you can see why we need to divest from oil and invest in nuclear tech to take up the base load

    • aeronmelon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      I’m surprised that solar isn’t yet big enough to be broken out on its own.

      I’m also surprised that natural gas is outgrowing everything else.

      • kbin_space_program@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Natural gas is just Methane and is being pushed by big oil, since it needs all of the infrastructure they already have.

      • Forester@yiffit.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I’m surprised that solar isn’t yet big enough to be broken out on its own.

        and that’s the problem. It’s not even enough of our power generation to be its own separate entity on the graph, but these people expect it to just magically power the planet in the next 5 years.

      • Forester@yiffit.netOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I’m not knocking solar. It’s a great technology. It’s just not feasible to scale to the point that we would need to scale it to sufficiently power our societies . We only recently developed the technology to make burning methane more feasible. They used to just light it off and burn it at the wells when they would tap it.

        • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          It’s just not feasible to scale to the point that we would need to scale it to sufficiently power our societies

          Anything to back that up?

          • Forester@yiffit.netOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            It’s a logistical problem basically most people don’t live at the equator and that’s the good spot for solar where it’s three times as effective. We could plaster a quarter of all the land with solar panels and then yeah you have enough. Except you still wouldn’t have a dependable energy inputs because sometimes the weather is shitty for a week. So you would still need the massive transition cables to pipe it in from somewhere else that the sun currently is shining. So basically you are going to need to cover massive amounts of land with solar panels. We would need to invest in massive transfer cables. I honestly think that would be a great idea to implement full coverage of solar panels in our cities and cover all things with them. However, do not think that’s a viable solution to meet our total energy needs. I do think solar is a viable way to help meet those goals. But it needs to be part of a team, not a solo. Lone Wolf . https://youtu.be/7OpM_zKGE4o?si=2_TW0JeYeA2htQm1

            • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              We could use solar (or other renewables/nuclear) to power hydrogen fuel cells, then take the energy where it’s needed.

              • Forester@yiffit.netOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

                Hydrogen transport is also a mass of pain in the ass because hydrogen being the noblest of gases and only a single hydrogen molecule likes to seep out of every container we’ve ever made and there’s no way to permanently contain it.

                • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  Hydrogen transport is also a mass of pain in the ass because hydrogen being the noblest of gases and only a single hydrogen molecule likes to seep out of every container we’ve ever made and there’s no way to permanently contain it.

                  This statement you’ve made here is mostly accurate and informative. Hydrogen isn’t a noble gas, its brother Helium is. Hydrogen is highly reactive. However, your points about Hydrogen storage and transport are spot on. You’re not insulting nor condescending in this post. Nearly every other response you’ve made in this whole post is the opposite.

                  You are clearly capable of civil and informative responses, but because you have so few you’ve lost the audience you want to inform/persuade a long time ago. Are you aware of that?

                  • Forester@yiffit.netOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    5
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    This is /c/shitpost im not debating civilly as the arguments I get aren’t in good faith 9 times out of 10. I’m not here to be a school teacher. More of a doomsday preacher