Is Green Energy good?
Other urls found in this thread:
google.com
twitter.com
No. See: California Blackouts
Better than big Zionist oil corporations
there's no such thing as "green energy"
even electrical cars are not green - the power you charge them with,comes from high polutant power sources.
the only green energy posible is solar and wind, wich cannot be used for the highlly populated areas, only per familly home.
the "green energy" hypothesis is nullified by over-population.
Found the big oil shill
Rocketman will nuke you shills. Fucking dog people.
so, you've never heard of nuclear energy ?
why are boomers zoomers and the rest so scared of efficiency and power nuclear energy can provide ?
Is coffee good for you?
Yes, but when done efficiently and pragmatically and not when pushed by incompetent government subsidies or some kind of moral agenda. There are plenty of ways and applications where solar, wind and other renewables make economic sense without having drastic self-defeating effects on ecology.
Government focus should remain on R&D, not on expansion. All that does is building wind and solar farms that are not economically viable without subsidies. When the subsidies fall away, the farms will be demolished again, making all the CO2 and other pollution produced to make them a total waste.
And no, there is no "green energy" without the greenest energy of all; nuclear. As long as "ecologists" and "well-meaning" bureaucrats keep pushing for the dismantlement of existing nuclear stations, there can be no viable alternative to cheap and efficient oil and gas energy creation.
have you heard of Chernobyl or Fukushima? most nuclear plants in the world are way over their lifespan expectation.
Another Zionist big oil bot
Gib banana milk
this scares zionist nigger cattle
Kys
>no bro you must depend on wind turbines that break in 10 years and turn into useless pile of garbage
>you must depend on chink silicone panels that die in 5 years and turn into big chunk of garbage
>you must convert 50% of green area of your land into the solar farm, that is what green should be
hell yeah now THAT is what i call NATURE
Depends on what type you are talking about
My understanding right now:
Nuclear power plants would be the best choice at this moment
Solar & Wind (& Water) have a lot of problems
- low lifetime
- unreliable & spikes -> forces some kind of battery storage
- batteries would make it environmentally unfriendly
Green Gas i do not know enough about
Hydrogen takes a lot of power to create in the first place so not environmentally friendly
Not aware of any other ideas atm
No but asian tits are
Fukushima resulted in 2 deaths and Chernobyl in 26 deaths. They are both absolute worst case scenarios for ancient reactor designs, and the safety systems have improved drastically. Not only that but 4th gen reactors can burn the previously spent fuel from these designs and get rid of old nuclear waste.
You are literally retarded.
>hydrogen
made from water. The most explosive gas. By product is pure water. Can be stored as water.
>Wind
big fan that spins. Zero by products. Kills less birds than airplanes and cars combined.
For comparison, Coal fired plants kill an estimated 13,000 Americans per year and 23,000 Europoors
watch the video golem
The damage caused by nuclear failure is minuscule compared to the damage caused by fossil fuels. The water pollution from a single oil spill alone is enough to decimate entire ecosystems, but you morons focus big scary nuclear leaks as if it was in any way worse. Anti-nuclear shills are fucking retarded. Two high-publicity disasters from nuclear do not outweighs decades of low publicity disasters from oil and coal. The world is facing a climate crisis that threatens millions of people but you’re sitting there with your blinders on pretending our current path is inevitable.
>can be stored as water
think: conservation of energy
>The world is facing a climate crisis
this is wrong
world is not facing a crisis as world does not give a fucking shit about its living inhabitants, especially sub species which are homosapien
Saying homosapien has effect on the earth is like sayingn you can catch the wind with rope
That asian bitch is green energy for my dick I'd you know what I'm saying.
But humans do catch wind with ropes, it's called a sail
how did it come to a point where one of the 6 big questions for a puppet of the only superpower on this earth is "adress global warming" as if it's the fact
are americans really this braindead to believe anything that media tells them and it really concerns them ?
Oh yeah, the victim of one of the greatest natural catastrophes of modern history in terms of unleashed energy and the absolute perfect storm in terms of mismanagement and human errors that happened with soviet standards 35 years ago.
Standards have evolved, security is always becoming more automated and more efficient. look up some stats and see that nuclear energy is literally the safest source of power ever created by man.
google.com
Pretty titties
The world is facing a climate crisis.
The rapidly changing climate is leading to dramatic biodiversity loss. People are facing new challenges such as islands near sea level disappearing, changing animal ranges, increased pest presence, the emergence of temperature-resistant fungi and parasites, proliferation of weapons invasive species bolstered by ecological disruption, dying coral reefs, and increased seasonality. That’s a crisis.
By rapidly altering the proportion of carbon stored in the atmosphere and oceans relative to in the ground humans contributed to that. Like it’s not even a debate anymore. If you don’t understand that you’re just illiterate.
And you can catch wind with a rope retard. Sails are made of thread. Threat is tiny rope. People use sails to catch the wind and cross entire oceans.
>And you can catch wind with a rope retard
Only solar and win?
The hell is wrong with Hydro (besides all the flooding of areas and improper removal of plants leading to high mercury concentrations)
Stop watching porn.
I feel like post-industrialized nations were doing fine with negative birth rates etc. but now we are funding and importing and subsidizing the expansion of people that can't support civilization anyway. I feel like we solved the issue but it was sabotaged with immigration.
>is Green Energy good?
Yes, but it's still maybe half a century away from being economical, efficient, or reliable enough to depend upon or even begin to realistically phase out fossil fuels.
We should, genuinely, be funding research and development into 'green' renewable energies as much as possible- if only because they have the massive potential to provide energy from sources we take for granted all the time. It's in our obvious best interest to utilize solar, wind, hydro, etc.. Whenever possible and practical.
Nuclear is quite promising, but the problem with Nuclear is that in order to fully utilize it you basically have to be 100% no bullshit.
Nuclear isn't popular for two reasons:
-There's no cost incentive as building a Nuclear Power Plant costs something like 6 to 9 billion dollars and, or so I've heard, take 60 years to pay off due to how inexpensive the vast quantities of energy the plant constantly provides.
-Kind of a two-and-a-half-reason, but people don't like the responsibility that comes with an "old" nuclear power plant. They're expensive to put up and they're expensive to take down.
-Nuclear Power Plants also take 5-7 years to build in the first place and they often get canceled before they even make it off the writing board simply because the State or the Provincial government elects someone else and they change their mind.
In order for Nuclear Power Plants to bring us that 'clean, cheap, energy' future we're so desperate for: everybody in the government and energy sector would basically all have to agree to not only refuse to cut corners, respect all safety measures, but generate vast quantities of energy with no guarantee of profit.
imagine reading book that is not new testament, no thanks, i do not bloat my brain with shit
you do not know what you're talking about
next
Solar is the only really obvious route, but it took us 30 years to get from 5% to 15% effeciency. Autistic zoomer mentality wants instant results but its gonna take decades for the shit to get good. 40% effeciency would be a game changer and solve most if not all our problems.
Built for Big Baltic Cock
>Coal Deaths.
Nobody ever talks about this one. This is genuinely the big con in my eyes concerning coal.
Mining and harvesting Coal is simultaneously more and less lethal than it's ever been before. Coal Miners are no longer in any real danger of being crushed by fucking rocks dying in a mine shaft due to gas leaks, but the fine black powder produced by coal mining shreds their lungs.
Black Lung is rampant among them and the average life span of a Coal Miner remains something like 56 years old.
If you always do the opposite of what the jews say, yes. Nice bobs.
It can be descent but only for certain areas
Solar Energy requires a shit load of silicon which the refinement produces more pollution than coal mines just due to the extra effort of mining and refining it. Solar energy also only works in specific areas which are usually migrations paths for birds which will in fact explode in flames when going over it. It also results in the general area being cooler which drives native life away.
Wind is good as long as you have it again migration paths for birds. It's not very reliable you can use batteries to store energy but that brings you to the same problem as Solar Panels just more pollution making the batteries than what is saved
Hydrolic again situational. Kills fish though some dams are trying to have no fish killing features put in though they aren't even 40% effective. It is also not supplying enough energy for anything more than 1 city unless it's the Hoover Dam
Nuclear is by far the best, however we are actively running out of places to put the waste. Even 3rd world countries can't take anymore of it, we were paying them to take it before, and our dumps are pretty full. Dumping it in the Ocean like Chinese has killed a ton of deep sea life
>Solar is the only really obvious route, but it took us 30 years to get from 5% to 15% effeciency.
Only just last year they finally discovered that the mineral 'perovskite' could be used to increase solar panel efficiency to a whopping 18% to 23%.
It's "coming along", but it's definitely a slow fucking process that we won't benefit from until we, ourselves, are seniors.