Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

moser512 t1_j7w6h2p wrote

Humans have spent roughly 4.5 trillion dollars on renewables like wind and solar. I’m that time, energy derived from petroleum products has decreased from 83% to 82% globally.

Wind and solar are intermittent sources of energy. They don’t produce power when when the sun isn’t shining or wind blowing. Furthermore, they require massive amounts of resource extraction via mining and refining to create the end product. After roughly 20 years, windmills and solar panels end up in landfills almost as large as the area of land they were built on.

I think they have place in the overall energy mix. But they produce very little energy, and there is very little “renewable” about them.


dunderpust t1_j7yopig wrote

How much did we spend on non-renewable sources then? You are surely aware that 1. That money was the inefficient starting boost paid for by rich countries to push prices of renewables down so that the real race can start and 2. Energy usage has grown massively in the part of the world that cannot afford renewables - until now when prices has been pushed down? Rich countries emissions are decreasing as RE sources (and energy efficiency) is being added. Only by squinting and looking at a whole world average can one say that switching to renewables is not the way to cut emissions.

Either you're trying to say third world countries of some 5 to 6 billion people should replace their entire energy generation with nuclear power, in which case you are delusional, or you are saying that we should just give up on decarbonizing altogether, in which case you are a nutter or a monster.

Sorry, my tone is quite harsh I realize, but if all you have to say is "it can't be done" then you are just adding noise. We don't know if it can be done but we sure as fuck better give it a good try.


moser512 t1_j7zxi07 wrote

I think it would be wonderful if we were able to achieve the energy needed to maintain our current standard of living from renewable sources. My point was that wind and solar will never come close to doing that.

That was literally the only point I made.

As of right now, nuclear fission is the safest, most reliable, and dense energy source of base load clean power available. Obviously, third world countries don’t have the energy grid to support the type of large reactors that have historically built in the past. Hopefully small modular reactors can change that.


dunderpust t1_j82ars0 wrote

In 2021, renewable energy was almost 6% of world energy. What prevents it from being 16, 60, or 100? The main challenge now is electrification. Whether the electrons comes from PVs or nuclear plants is irrelevant, the only thing that matters is getting enough electricity. My personal opinion is we would should go full speed ahead on nuclear AND renewables, providing nuclear doesn't delay or stop renewables. As in, the sentiment "oh we don't have to build that wind farm, in 5 years time we will have a nuclear plant up and running" has to die. We will need so much electricity that both the nuclear plant and the wind farm combined will not be enough.

Also, I leave you with this graph why people are not expecting miracles from nuclear but supporting renewables:

You may try and convince yourself that exponential curve of wind and solar will break in a year or two, but you'll be more and more alone in that.