Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

wenestvedt t1_it7iapy wrote

Good! I would prefer our power was coming from renewable sources.

19

Guyincognito4269 t1_it7kfjb wrote

And if anything, that can lower the bullshit rate jack the RI Energy of fucking Pennsylvania just got.

12

Yz-Guy t1_it83gmt wrote

Yeah right. It'll go up another 15% to pay for the windmills

9

glennjersey t1_it8icej wrote

Typically built in Germany too iirc. Certainly not locally sourced, or even domestically sourced.

You know the carbon impact to ship those huge things across the ocean? Any idea what the ROI from a carbon footprint standpoint is?

Most people think oh great renewable energy, but don't even take a second thought to the bigger picture or total product life cycle.

−5

omnimon_X t1_it8v5sf wrote

say the line, Bart

3

glennjersey t1_it9360u wrote

I think you misunderstand me and my point. I'm all for solar and wind energy, but these are not nearly the slam dunk magic bullet fixes people proclaim them to be.

Similar to how the best thing you can do vehicle wise (aside from not using one or taking public transit) is to keep your 4-cylinder econobox and drive it until it doesn't anymore. NOT run out and buy the new sexy all electric vehicle with the lithium batteries (which are awful for the environment) and just get powered ny whatever powers your wall at home anyway (hint, it's mostly natural gas).

There's a reason it is REDUCE, REUSE. RECYCLE, in that order. That's the order of impact.

Almost everything done or suggested to date is greenwashing at beat, or deliberately leaving details out at worst.

The energy and carbon cost to fabricate a wind turbine and ship it overseas is astronomical.

At least with solar panels it's a low production cost and you can cram a lot of them into a 40ft container to amortize the shipping cost impact across a lot of panels making it somewhat less of an impact.

If you care about the environment, don't just support sexy big initiatives (at least not without fully understand the total life cycle of their impacts), but make smaller changes to REDUCE your own impact.

Keep your thermostat at a moderate temp at put a sweatshirt on (or shorts depending on the season). Dry your clothes on a line, not in the dryer. Don't buy/lease a new car every 3 years, run your existing one into the ground or bike/walk or take mass transit.

These changes will net for net have a bigger impact that you're in control over rather than some big sexy initiative that has a larger carbon footprint than the 20 year payback, and are trash from a carbon/environment ROI perspective

1

omnimon_X t1_ita0e9c wrote

>There's a reason it is REDUCE, REUSE. RECYCLE, in that order. That's the order of impact.

Which one is worse over 30-50 years? 100mw offshore wind or 100mw fossil fuel?

5

mdurg68 t1_itbore4 wrote

Why in the world are you getting downvoted for that? People don’t have common sense.

2

glennjersey t1_itccepd wrote

Reddit is fickle. Like most of the internet they don't want to hear the truth. They want nice curated repeatable soundbites and low complexity answers/solutions.

I minored in Green Engineering and have been living and breathing this shit for the better part of the last decade, but what do I know, right?

2

BitterStatus9 t1_itbmym0 wrote

“This food is terrible, and the portions are so small!”

1

mdurg68 t1_itbpctr wrote

If it adds capacity to the market and it isn’t taxpayer subsidized then I’m for it.

I’m learning about home solar now and what I don’t understand is why they don’t let you overproduce and sell back to the grid if you have the roof space. Did the energy industry lobby the state to keep this power away from the people?

1

BigE1263 t1_it8ohqs wrote

Not sayin g I’m against this but we shouldn’t have removed our coal plants ahead of planning wind farms. We are gonna have major blackouts this year I fear.

−8

Proof-Variation7005 t1_it8vh0e wrote

What coal plants did we remove specifically? Fossil fuel companies have used the "blackout" threat/fear every year.

See the top comment on this post

4

BigE1263 t1_it9bq4m wrote

Brayton point, the brags bridge coal plant. Pretty much the larger ones

−2

Proof-Variation7005 t1_it9el7r wrote

I'd probably counter by pointing out Brayton point was not in Rhode Island was closed by the private company that owned it because it was like 60 years old and not cost effective.

That isn't some regulatory overreach or a miscalculation of the energy market. It's just shit being old and capitalism. Coal plants aren't exactly meant to last forever and that shit was into its 7th decade of operation.

5

Nomadhero_ t1_it9was1 wrote

Rhode Island's energy usage comes from natural gas...

3