4 ms·

> It only gets the label if it's greener than existing solutions. They're not letting perfect be the enemy of good. That sounds very idiotic to me. One of the

by fivea 5y ago

> It only gets the label if it's greener than existing solutions. They're not letting perfect be the enemy of good. That sounds very idiotic to me. One of the biggest environmental threats is global warming, which is caused by reintroducing carbon into the atmosphere through the use of fossil fuels. It makes no sense at all to label fossil fuel usage as green just because they manage to come up with an arbitrary line in the sand for unrelated pollutants and in the process ignore carbon emissions.

nameisname 5y ago
The threat is humanity. The amount of pollution that will ultimately be created by the gas plants is a drop in the bucket compared to humanity overall and will largely be offset by renewables.
unionpivo 5y ago
> They're not letting perfect be the enemy of good. The best you can do sometimes, its just to be less bad. If you can replace coal or diesel powered power plant into modern gas powered plant, you will emit a lot less CO2 for equivalent power. Solar and wind are not enough jet. We need something that can produce electricity 24 hours a day, or on demand. The "greenest" such tech are nuclear and gas. I have high hopes of geothermal, maybe replacing a lot of gas, but we are not there jet.
input_sh 5y ago
It's caused by an ever increasing amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, and it's solvable by drastically decreasing that amount. Its origin is nowhere in that equation. > and in the process ignore carbon emissions. Natural gas is the best of the worst, and it contributes to the solution in the specific case where it replaces even worse options (like coal plants). I'd argue that <270g CO2 per kWh is far too high of a threshold, but that's still at least a half of what even the "cleanest" coal plants produce per kWh. It's not the best solution and nobody is arguing that, but it is a solution in very specific circumstances.

by fivea 5y ago

nameisname 5y ago

The threat is humanity. The amount of pollution that will ultimately be created by the gas plants is a drop in the bucket compared to humanity overall and will largely be offset by renewables.

unionpivo 5y ago

> They're not letting perfect be the enemy of good. The best you can do sometimes, its just to be less bad. If you can replace coal or diesel powered power plant into modern gas powered plant, you will emit a lot less CO2 for equivalent power. Solar and wind are not enough jet. We need something that can produce electricity 24 hours a day, or on demand. The "greenest" such tech are nuclear and gas. I have high hopes of geothermal, maybe replacing a lot of gas, but we are not there jet.

input_sh 5y ago

It's caused by an ever increasing amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, and it's solvable by drastically decreasing that amount. Its origin is nowhere in that equation. > and in the process ignore carbon emissions. Natural gas is the best of the worst, and it contributes to the solution in the specific case where it replaces even worse options (like coal plants). I'd argue that <270g CO2 per kWh is far too high of a threshold, but that's still at least a half of what even the "cleanest" coal plants produce per kWh. It's not the best solution and nobody is arguing that, but it is a solution in very specific circumstances.