Someone explain to me green energy

[apathy]

Okay maybe I wasn't there when the Kool-Aid was passed out, but how is it environmentally friendly to cut down beautiful forests near where I live to make way for monstrous wind turbines that don't work half-the-time and kill eagles the rest of the time.

How am I being good to the environment for recycling plastic instead of putting it in a landfill, when 80% of the cr@p can't be recycled, and ends up shipped off to a foreign country, where they eventually dump it in the Pacific Ocean?

Am I green for demanding renewables and electric cars when they are toxic, can't be recycled and force some child into slave labour to mine for the rare Earth elements to make them?

Why is solar energy considered green when the sun is fusing up its hydrogen reserves in doing so? And will eventually destroy the inner solar system in 5 billion years when it becomes a Red Giant star. Destruction on a cosmic scale sounds pretty green to me.

I think the planet has never been worse off since we started caring for it...

[Netaris]

Wind turbines are the worst, it cost a lot, it produce not enough and not all the time, forcing you to use other energies as a complement such as coal or gas. The "greenest" energy we have currently is ... Nuclear fission. Yep.

[Irene ❤]

If they can master nuclear fusion, it's true form of strong green energy. And a lot of energy.
Everything else is a 'struggle' - wind turbines solar panels etc. Child's play of small battery recharge compared to nuclear fusion.

- Powers an entire nation.
- Unlike fission, nuclear fusion does not produce any radioactive waste
- it only produces helium
- Can be used to make balloons

[Xero_Daxter]

I’m gonna have 5,000 pet hamsters and make them run on a wheel to power my house.

[Netaris]

Origineel geplaatst door Irene ❤:

Unlike fission, nuclear fusion does not produce any radioactive waste

That's not entirelly true as some parts of the reactor itself may actually become nuclear wastes. But it still produce way less nuclear wastes than fission reactors yes.

[Vinegaroon]

Origineel geplaatst door Your_White_Knight:

Origineel geplaatst door Vinegaroon:

So fun fact 34% of the power here in Texas comes from wind and solar. Around 10ish percent nuclear, the rest being coal and natural gas.

It's only 4% from solar and 24% from wind ( 28% )... 42% natural gas and 19% coal ( 61% )

Not to mention... every 4 - 12 years those wind turbine blades and solar panels need to be changed out and they end up in landfills because they're not very recyclable...

https://youtu.be/8fSv7lNo1eM

Sorry I got different numbers. I was looking at 2022 but Here is a useful site

https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=TX#tabs-4

Thing is there will always be maintenance. The fact they are bothering to pay the cost to maintain the blades means it’s viable economically. A geo political strategist explained that one in a way that makes sense. Basically there is a wind and solar belt where it is practical to generate power from wind and solar economically viable to have them power, because people live there. Texas hits both.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tJvpn98XsHQ&pp=ygUZUGV0ZXIgemllaGFuIGdyZWVuIGVuZXJneQ%3D%3D

I forgot which video he presents that in but this one is still relavant.

Now Waste going to a landfill is a problem yes, but it’s American we suck at recycling and this is a problem in all industries not just the power industry. This is something we really need to work on badly. It’s really inexcusable how bad we are at this.

[Your_White_Knight]

Origineel geplaatst door Xero_Daxter:

I’m gonna have 5,000 pet hamsters and make them run on a wheel to power my house.

Hamsters eat pellets and make pellets... I hope you have two big shovels...

[Lupinus Rictus]

Origineel geplaatst door Ad Victoriam !:

Wind turbines are the worst, it cost a lot, it produce not enough and not all the time, forcing you to use other energies as a complement such as coal or gas. The "greenest" energy we have currently is ... Nuclear fission. Yep.

" Over its life-cycle, nuclear produces about the same amount of CO2-equivalent emissions per unit of electricity as wind, and about one-third that of solar. "

Quote taken from World Nuclear Association's own website *shrug*

https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/energy-and-the-environment/carbon-dioxide-emissions-from-electricity.aspx

[GloriousZote]

Origineel geplaatst door Your_White_Knight:

Origineel geplaatst door Xero_Daxter:

I’m gonna have 5,000 pet hamsters and make them run on a wheel to power my house.

Hamsters eat pellets and make pellets... I hope you have two big shovels... :lunar2019crylaughingpig:

They also die in the dumbest of ways.

[Xero_Daxter]

Origineel geplaatst door Your_White_Knight:

Origineel geplaatst door Xero_Daxter:

I’m gonna have 5,000 pet hamsters and make them run on a wheel to power my house.

Hamsters eat pellets and make pellets... I hope you have two big shovels... :lunar2019crylaughingpig:

I have a better idea. I’m gonna put a saddle on a pig and put a carrot in from of him attached to a fishing line. Cars will go bankrupt.

[Your_White_Knight]

Origineel geplaatst door Vinegaroon:

Origineel geplaatst door Your_White_Knight:

It's only 4% from solar and 24% from wind ( 28% )... 42% natural gas and 19% coal ( 61% )

Not to mention... every 4 - 12 years those wind turbine blades and solar panels need to be changed out and they end up in landfills because they're not very recyclable...

https://youtu.be/8fSv7lNo1eM

Sorry I got different numbers. I was looking at 2022 but Here is a useful site

https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=TX#tabs-4

Thing is there will always be maintenance. The face they are bothering to pay the cost to maintain the blade means it’s viable economically. A geo political strategist explained that one in a way that makes sense. Basically there is a wind and solar belt where it is practical to generate power from wind and solar economically viable to have them power because people live there. Texas hits both.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tJvpn98XsHQ&pp=ygUZUGV0ZXIgemllaGFuIGdyZWVuIGVuZXJneQ%3D%3D

I forgot which video he presents that in but this it is still relavant.

Now Waste going to a landfill is a problem yes but it’s American we suck at recycling and this is a problem in all industries not just the power industry. This is something we really need to work on badly.

That's great... but one can't say "never mind the problems, it's 28% and we'll worry about the waste filling the landfills later" and try to claim to be "green"... they're doing maintenance that's causing more harm then it's doing good right now...

Work on that "badly" part... ~then~ we'll be impressed at it. Right now... it's no better then gas / coal.

[lightwo]

I thought the OP was a question, but for the most part it's right. Environmental BS is... BS, always has been. That includes idiocies like global warming. It's all connected.

[Netaris]

Origineel geplaatst door SAINROK:

" Over its life-cycle, nuclear produces about the same amount of CO2-equivalent emissions per unit of electricity as wind, and about one-third that of solar. "

Quote taken from World Nuclear Association's own website *shrug*

https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/energy-and-the-environment/carbon-dioxide-emissions-from-electricity.aspx

And ? Can we talk about the liters of oil in each wind turbine ? Knowing that one liter of oil can pollute one square meter of soil. The quantity of oil greatly vary with the type of wind turbine, but it can go from 250 liters to 2500 liters ... Most examples I've finded have around 600 liters of oil. So, 600 square meters of soil poluted if there is some leakage ? Yep, very "green" ...

[Dracoco OwO]

Here are some facts, Germany is supposedly really eco friendly right? But they are the ones who pushed to close nuclear centrals and create many open coal mines, thus destroying their beautifull environnement for a sub par electricity production with coal power plants.

[ZZZZZ]

Origineel geplaatst door Dracoco OwO:

Here are some facts, Germany is supposedly really eco friendly right? But they are the ones who pushed to close nuclear centrals and create many open coal mines, thus destroying their beautifull environnement for a sub par electricity production with coal power plants.

the energy companies made that decision cause nuclear energy was too expensive, the extremely conservative german government just refused to replace it with more modern energy solutions

[Vinegaroon]

Origineel geplaatst door Your_White_Knight:

Origineel geplaatst door Vinegaroon:

Sorry I got different numbers. I was looking at 2022 but Here is a useful site

https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=TX#tabs-4

Thing is there will always be maintenance. The face they are bothering to pay the cost to maintain the blade means it’s viable economically. A geo political strategist explained that one in a way that makes sense. Basically there is a wind and solar belt where it is practical to generate power from wind and solar economically viable to have them power because people live there. Texas hits both.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tJvpn98XsHQ&pp=ygUZUGV0ZXIgemllaGFuIGdyZWVuIGVuZXJneQ%3D%3D

I forgot which video he presents that in but this it is still relavant.

Now Waste going to a landfill is a problem yes but it’s American we suck at recycling and this is a problem in all industries not just the power industry. This is something we really need to work on badly.

That's great... but one can't say "never mind the problems, it's 28% and we'll worry about the waste filling the landfills later" and try to claim to be "green"... they're doing maintenance that's causing more harm then it's doing good right now...

Work on that "badly" part... ~then~ we'll be impressed at it. Right now... it's no better then gas / coal.

I agree we have a lot of work to do. Though it’s good we have made some progress.