4 ms·

Funny you should say that. So it turns out providing 40 kWh of battery backup to 128M homes would create about 500M tons of CO2. In comparison, the coal indust

Funny you should say that. So it turns out providing 40 kWh of battery backup to 128M homes would create about 500M tons of CO2. In comparison, the coal industry annually contributes 1.9B tons of CO2 and spews 120M tons of toxic waste which would be gone if we shut this industry down for the low low price of $12B. Conclusion: there really isn't a good argument against this other than people are being dumb. Or pray tell what that argument is. Also once again I already mentioned nuclear as part of the solution where solar doesn't work. I continue to be confused as to why people keep choosing to ignore that.

verdverm 5y ago
One might note that getting solar roof panels can be a pain in certain localities and that insurance companies are dropping people for having large batteries or EVs due to fire risk. You can cherry pick a few numbers, but it does not come close to the full accounting required for a proper analysis. Not saying it's a bad goal to switch over, just that the true costs are not being expressed, and that it's not some simple thing you can just do
- varelse 5y ago
  You can always naysay but sometimes you just need to set a goal and go for it. Coal comes at a tremendously detrimental cost. I don't get how anyone continues to make a case for it. It even generates more radioactive waste than nuclear power does. I just don't get it. Also if you don't like the numbers I just gave you then do the work to come up with a more accurate set of them rather than FUD them https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-...
- varelse 5y ago
  I went looking for these insurance companies that are dropping insurance policies over battery backup systems or EVs and I couldn't find any. Do you have a source for this or did you just hear that somewhere?

verdverm 5y ago

One might note that getting solar roof panels can be a pain in certain localities and that insurance companies are dropping people for having large batteries or EVs due to fire risk. You can cherry pick a few numbers, but it does not come close to the full accounting required for a proper analysis. Not saying it's a bad goal to switch over, just that the true costs are not being expressed, and that it's not some simple thing you can just do

varelse 5y ago
You can always naysay but sometimes you just need to set a goal and go for it. Coal comes at a tremendously detrimental cost. I don't get how anyone continues to make a case for it. It even generates more radioactive waste than nuclear power does. I just don't get it. Also if you don't like the numbers I just gave you then do the work to come up with a more accurate set of them rather than FUD them https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-...
varelse 5y ago
I went looking for these insurance companies that are dropping insurance policies over battery backup systems or EVs and I couldn't find any. Do you have a source for this or did you just hear that somewhere?