3 ms·
He takes into account what you're saying. "Undoubtedly, a well-sited and well-built wind turbine would generate as much energy as it embodies in less than a ye
by kumarski 10y ago
He takes into account what you're saying.
"Undoubtedly, a well-sited and well-built wind turbine would generate as much energy as it embodies in less than a year. However, all of it will be in the form of intermittent electricity—while its production, installation, and maintenance remain critically dependent on specific fossil energies."
As an Indian engineer, I'm waiting for westerners to pony up and let us have Nuclear energy instead of toying around with Solar and Wind hype for the developing world. It just doesn't cut it and uranium and nuclear blocking IP keep us in the stone ages, so does western hype around solar/wind.
We needed Uranium yesterday.
300M Indians went to sleep last night without electricity and we have a similar number of farmers b/c wind and solar don't provide us with escape velocity baseload to build out nitrogen and steel feedstock electricity.
Ahemm.... I feel somewhat extremely alone in Silicon Valley and hackernews in my views on this.
Not sure if anyone else in here grew up around farmer suicides and high infant mortality, but it'd make you feel a little bit of angst toward all the solar/wind hype as your lithosphere crumbles.....to lignite 50% ash coal burning through your soil chemistry and ravaging your air to make up the difference of energy shortages.
- _ph_ 10y agoWhy do you claim the west does not let you have nuclear? According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_India there is nuclear power in India and it is growing? Whether this is the most economic (not mention safe) way of extending the electricity supply is another question. As far as I am aware, India is quite aggressively investing in solar too. In sunny regions, solar is way cheaper than nuclear already. And the same applies for wind, especially in costal regions.