3 ms·

> Being anti-dam is environmental NIMBYism. Hard disagree. Dams simply need to be categorized as dirty energy. They are probably less dirty than coal or natur

> Being anti-dam is environmental NIMBYism. Hard disagree. Dams simply need to be categorized as dirty energy. They are probably less dirty than coal or natural gas energy. However dams are dirty and they should be treated as such. Categorizing an energy source as dirty does not mean we don't use it. It doesn't even mean we don't build more of it. We don't have 100% clean energy today. I hope that someday we do. And when we are 100% clean energy I hope that 0% of it comes from dams. Because dam energy is extremely unclean, damaging, and harmful. And it's not "NIMBY" to say so.

nine_k 5y ago
This makes them a rather unique class of dirty renewables.
solarengineer 5y ago
I have sometimes wondered if we could consider specific solar and wind energy sites as 100% clean if we could calculate their carbon costs and actively take actions to counter carbon release to at least that amount. E.g., if a 1 KM solar farm took 12 Tons of Carbon and 1 tree sequesters 25 Kilos of Carbon per year, then we could start a forest of 500 trees using the Miyawaki Method and keep it thriving. I have come across messages stating that Trees sequester Carbon for now only to release it all eventually, but Trees provide much more. They provide oxygen, a habitat for animal and insect life, they cool down an area, help attract clouds for rain, hold together the ground soil to prevent erosion, etc. We ought to be reforesting and afforesting land again to compensate for all the cover that we've lost. Ensuring forests would help carbon-offset the carbon-load required to set up Low Carbon energy sources for locations that need them.
Ekaros 5y ago
Then is anything clean? As wind and solar both have clear externalities in manufacturing and decommissioning... Probably well burned wood and other biomass might qualify. Though that is quite complex thing to do at least with particulate emissions...
- josefx 5y ago
  Do these externalities also affect thermal solar power? It tends to be a bit less efficient than photovoltaic when it comes to power production but probably avoids the rare earth metals.
thehappypm 5y ago
Does hydro have drawbacks? Yes. They change ecosystems. In many cases the new ecosystems are less desirable from the human perspective, but the reservoirs and rivers that are changed are still plenty viable for all sorts of ecosystems and life. This is highly different from fossil fuels, which produce pollution, toxins, and directly contribute to all of the evils of climate change.

nine_k 5y ago

This makes them a rather unique class of dirty renewables.

solarengineer 5y ago

I have sometimes wondered if we could consider specific solar and wind energy sites as 100% clean if we could calculate their carbon costs and actively take actions to counter carbon release to at least that amount. E.g., if a 1 KM solar farm took 12 Tons of Carbon and 1 tree sequesters 25 Kilos of Carbon per year, then we could start a forest of 500 trees using the Miyawaki Method and keep it thriving. I have come across messages stating that Trees sequester Carbon for now only to release it all eventually, but Trees provide much more. They provide oxygen, a habitat for animal and insect life, they cool down an area, help attract clouds for rain, hold together the ground soil to prevent erosion, etc. We ought to be reforesting and afforesting land again to compensate for all the cover that we've lost. Ensuring forests would help carbon-offset the carbon-load required to set up Low Carbon energy sources for locations that need them.

Ekaros 5y ago

Then is anything clean? As wind and solar both have clear externalities in manufacturing and decommissioning... Probably well burned wood and other biomass might qualify. Though that is quite complex thing to do at least with particulate emissions...

josefx 5y ago
Do these externalities also affect thermal solar power? It tends to be a bit less efficient than photovoltaic when it comes to power production but probably avoids the rare earth metals.

thehappypm 5y ago

Does hydro have drawbacks? Yes. They change ecosystems. In many cases the new ecosystems are less desirable from the human perspective, but the reservoirs and rivers that are changed are still plenty viable for all sorts of ecosystems and life. This is highly different from fossil fuels, which produce pollution, toxins, and directly contribute to all of the evils of climate change.