>burning fossil fuels creates pollution
>pollution negatively effects the environment
>fossil fuels are a non renewable resource that eventuall run out
> solar panels and wind turbines have none of these issues
Why must devs insert these politics into my games? I just wanna play my games without an agenda shoved down my throat.
>politics
americans everyone
There's always severe nerfs for solar panels and wind turbines in games though, such as solar panels only working during the day and wind turbines being unreliable.
Facts are not political.
Identity politics are opinions, therefore political.
>Miss a jump while playing Mario
>gravity pulls me down into a pit
>die
Fucking politics
Shh, quiet user! You're blowing his act!
>pollution is ONLY smog byproducts
American education in a nutshell.
decent bait, got me to reply
t. american
there aren't wind turbines in factorio, larper
wind turbines kill birds
checkmate liberals
God why dont you just sell your flooded house you fucking troglydyte????
HAVE U NEV3R THOUGHY ABOUT THAT
ill shove sandpaper down your throat if you don't shut the fuck up you stupid fucking american
>better energy source is better
Wooooow
Also Factorio doesn't have wind turbines, and the game has nuclear power which is also superior, with the only downside being that it explodes if it's destroyed when active
>politics
user you make me think you just want to bait so that you can start a Factorio thread, in which case I admire your efforts
This thread had to be made by an underage brat.
No adult can actually believe this.
t. projecting american
any game which pretends that wind / solar would not have serious ecological impacts (while attempting to set up fossil fuels as having serious ecological impacts) is making a lazy political statement yes
mining neodymium creates radioactive waste lol
Wasting large amounts of space for turbines and solar panels still counts as "pollution" you uneducated dolts.
>> solar panels and wind turbines have none of these issues
the amount of fuel used to create panels or turbines means you need 10+ years of usage to balance it, at this point oyu will need to change them too and start over with balancing instead of reducing.
ok bro
What is the ecological impact of wind turbines? Dead birds? Because they fixed that problem by marking the blades with paint. How about solar? Please. Explain to me how these limitless zero emission resources have ecological impacts on the world.
>+10 years of usage to balance it
...
Bros, I'm not even done with green potions yet, but I don't have a high enough iron production, and there aren't any iron mines near me (other than the one I've already filled up). What do? Do I really just gotta rush trains as my only option to increase iron?
>He said, posting a vtuber
>Don't have to strip mine a three kilometre wide hole to start solar panel and battery production
probably the space it would require to generate even a fraction of that of what nuclear/fossil fuels make
yeah or lay a long belt
winds just shit actually, it doesnt work
solar is now at a point where its sustainable since it takes less energy to produce than it makes over its lifetime. It wasnt like 10 years ago.
>winds just shit actually, it doesnt work
>continues to go on about how solar used to be shit
Imagine had they stopped developing solar because it wasn't immediately sustainable. Something something american education. This site is full of retards.
Solar panels have a relatively short lifespan, and contain heavy metals which not only are toxic, are non-reciclable.
Solar CAN work, but in order to have the best efficiency, you literally need to build them next to the sun.
You know someone has been handed everything in life when they start telling other people how to live.
no shit fucking idiot
Lateral wind turbines are just better than your regular turbines, so why aren't there any?
They can be at ground level, they are cheaper to make, they can operate in lower windspeeds and they're easier to maintain. So where are they?
Because the green energy lobby doesn't give a shit, wind turbines, the classic vertical style, are a MASSIVE money laundering scheme, they don't want them to actually be good.
>states a bunch of facts
>calls then an agenda
Why do Americans make everything political?
>mining neodymium creates radioactive waste lol
I said it in the post you replied to. It's like you don't know the subject being talked about, or something.
Solar absolutely slaughters the ecosystems existing in and around the solar farms, not to mention that the "renewable energy" industry relies 100% on fossil fuel (oil) to function and has virtually zero vertical integration. It's an offshoot of production-consumption model, not a replacement. Vertical integration (i.e. how do we completely remove fossil fuels from the equation) would require strip mining the likes of which the world has never seen. Toxic heavy metals, radioactive waste, and clearing vast areas of life to plop down windmills and solar farms- land that will be dead forever and abandoned within a few decades at most.
Where I'm trying to get at is no matter where you build it on Earth or any rotating planet/celestial object matter, you're never going to get the most out of solar panels. It's better just to wait til they commercialize space travel.
Wind and Hydro can be extremely clean
But location matters. You shouldn't be replacing entire metro powergrids with wind.
>best power source is nuclear
JUST LIKE REAL LIFE
facts don't care about your feelings, sweatie,
if OP actually played the game he would ofc know that solar and wind have a much lower yield than fossil fuels or nuclear, reflecting the reality of these technologies. He would also know that these alternative sources come so late in the tech tree you've probably already exterminated every bug in a thousand mile radius making it a mute point, since the only problem with pollution in the game is it causes the native fauna to mutate and become (more) hostile.
But they didn't, because they never do.
We shouldn't have to settle for inefficient and developing technologies that can't singlehandedly meet our demands, France has already proven the power of nuclear.
If you also want a real critique of renewable energy there is a shit-ton of literature on the subject. Ted Kaczynski dedicated a large portion of his writing to explaining why the whole thing is fucked. Even Michael Moore is starting to catch on.
Mass replies get the rope.
Wind Turbines fuck with imminent wildlife and depending on the age of the model can be seriously noisy (modern models are quieter, but be aware that at least where I live they still try to set up old ones way too close to settlements). Location is key with them and then they're fine
Solar is just better imo
Common problem with both, they're not 100% relaible and won't offer a good baseload without batteries, and even then if you get really unlucky that won't be enough. In addition the batteries are actually pretty shit for the environment.
And these are the same people who are against deforestation mind you.
>no refutation, just muh rope
>quotes Ted Kacyznski the Unabomber as a good critique of renewables
>idiots falling for obvious bait thread