3 ms·

Then "good for you", as I already said. > The 90% value was dishonest No, the 90% value is more honest since exports reduce CO2 emissions just as much as dome

Then "good for you", as I already said. > The 90% value was dishonest No, the 90% value is more honest since exports reduce CO2 emissions just as much as domestic usage, but you prefer to cherry-pick the lowest number you can. I accepted your figures because even with them the point remains that Scotland has replaced its fossil fuel elec with renewable. A point you keep trying to evade. > what the heck are you supposed to do?????? Where exactly are you talking about now? I keep hearing that there are all these countries or states that have no ability to deploy renewables due to their geography, but I've never seen one actually specified. Where is it? > you invest in natural gas and coal, like Germany is doing Germany is investing in renewables and has increased its share from them each year.

macspoofing 6y ago
>the 90% value is more honest since exports reduce CO2 emissions just as much as domestic usage Let's torture this a little more. The reason why it's an important distinction because today we do not have a model of sizable country (and let's include Scotland in that group as well) that powers their economy by wind and solar. Scotland is not an example of that. There is no example of such a nation. >I keep hearing that there are all these countries or states that have no ability to deploy renewables due to their geography Come on, don't be obtuse. Almost every country that doesn't have hydro today will not have hydro tomorrow. Almost every country that has deployed hydro, will not have more hydro tomorrow. Why? Because, at least in the developed world, we've dammed every river that could be dammed over the last century. So no, you can't just rely on hydro as a solution to wind/solar base load problem - I wish it were so, but it isn't. So pick any country that doesn't have any sizable hydro deployment, and that country is an example you're seeking. >Germany is investing in renewables and has increased its share from them each year. They are also spending billions to build natural gas pipelines to Russia. What does that say about their confidence in wind/solar?

macspoofing 6y ago

>the 90% value is more honest since exports reduce CO2 emissions just as much as domestic usage Let's torture this a little more. The reason why it's an important distinction because today we do not have a model of sizable country (and let's include Scotland in that group as well) that powers their economy by wind and solar. Scotland is not an example of that. There is no example of such a nation. >I keep hearing that there are all these countries or states that have no ability to deploy renewables due to their geography Come on, don't be obtuse. Almost every country that doesn't have hydro today will not have hydro tomorrow. Almost every country that has deployed hydro, will not have more hydro tomorrow. Why? Because, at least in the developed world, we've dammed every river that could be dammed over the last century. So no, you can't just rely on hydro as a solution to wind/solar base load problem - I wish it were so, but it isn't. So pick any country that doesn't have any sizable hydro deployment, and that country is an example you're seeking. >Germany is investing in renewables and has increased its share from them each year. They are also spending billions to build natural gas pipelines to Russia. What does that say about their confidence in wind/solar?