Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] t1_j5sky5m wrote

Reply to comment by gerkletoss in Solar powered hydrogen facility being built in California by ForHidingSquirrels

[removed]

1

[deleted] t1_j5smloa wrote

[removed]

1

SandAndAlum t1_j5smwv0 wrote

No. You were repeating fossil fuel propaganda unrelated to the issue at hand.

1

gerkletoss t1_j5sn5my wrote

They use real concerns in their propaganda because it's effective

But you'll note that I only mentioned carbon-neutral alternative technologies here, which terrifies the fossil fuel industry. Or maybe not. My hopes aren't high.

1

SandAndAlum t1_j5sniku wrote

Except it's not a real concern when its less bad than any other option. By all means push for less land use, but pick the low hanging fruit first.

1

gerkletoss t1_j5snsqw wrote

The other carbon-neutral options are what I was talking about you reactionary hero

1

SandAndAlum t1_j5snx6r wrote

You continue to dog whistle gas with carbon capture (which is fictional) whilst not being brave enough to say it out loud.

1

gerkletoss t1_j5so2bi wrote

Yes, carbon capture is on the list of things I didn't say.

1

SandAndAlum t1_j5so76s wrote

Which continues to be fossil fuel propaganda.

1

gerkletoss t1_j5sohfm wrote

Fossil fuel propaganda would be accusing everyone who asks questions about hydrogen generation compared to other carbon-neutral technologies of being shills regardless of whether they're suggesting that it's probably great for certain applications in other contexts and were doing so before you made your accusation.

2

SandAndAlum t1_j5sp0hl wrote

You're attacking solar derived energy and dog whistling fossil fuel hydrogen. The motivation is obvious. This 'just asking questions' act fools nobody.

0