4 ms·
> we need to increase electricity generation by an integer factor As in India, which is nearly finished building from ~ 40GW to 170GW of renewable energy. And
by 8bitsrule 7y ago
> we need to increase electricity generation by an integer factor
As in India, which is nearly finished building from ~ 40GW to 170GW of renewable energy. And you skip past the powers of conservation. We don't need more power, we need less CO2.
> capable of scaling ... nuclear fission
The CO2 problem needs to be addressed promptly, and efficiently. Renewables build -much- more quickly, and the immediate cost of hundreds of nukes would finance thousands of green installs. (Waste aside.) Sunlight and wind are the result of the Sun's NF ... it eats the waste problem.
> I don't see any possibility.
Oh it's possible. What you 'see' as irrational politics I see as just as rational as the CO2 evidence. And the rational response is to vote out all of those who stand in the way of prompt and efficient.
- cgh 7y agoDid you read the articles (there are two)? They address renewables in depth.
- 8bitsrule 7y agoI did. I prefer to read what scientists and engineers have concluded, and have for decades. I like this: https://thesolutionsproject.org/resources/ https://thesolutionsproject.org/resources/ Consider if we had acted and done in the same short period what India has done, we'd now have the equivalent of 130 nuclear plants online ... ready for a mandate to move to electric transportation. The future cost of continued reliance on fossils completes the calculation.
- AstralStorm 7y agoThousands of green installations are two orders of magnitude behind in energy generation than hundreds of nuclear plants. And we're not even talking about economies of scale which renewables enjoy but nuclear plants do not yet.