10 ms·

For Germany as a whole I cannot speak, but it is an extremely common thing, yes, whether they know it or not. * Greenpeace Germany has a gas division. They've

For Germany as a whole I cannot speak, but it is an extremely common thing, yes, whether they know it or not. * Greenpeace Germany has a gas division. They've now split it off and officially only own 5 shares (while being headquartered in the exact same building, by the exact same Greenpeace members): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Planet_Energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Planet_Energy * Companies like Total have made use of their enormous war chest to take control of multiple organisations that push wind & solar power (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jan/22/fossil-fuel-firms-accused-renewable-lobby-takeover-push-gas https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jan/22/fossil-f...), knowing full well it cannot cover all of our energy needs and knowing they will be here to sell natural gas, continuing the use of fossil fuels. * Anti nuclear organizations are very often bankrolled by large oil lobbies (https://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilverstein/2016/07/13/are-fossil-fuel-interests-bankrolling-the-anti-nuclear-energy-movement/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilverstein/2016/07/13/are-f..., https://environmentalprogress.org/the-war-on-nuclear https://environmentalprogress.org/the-war-on-nuclear), once again, pushing to get nuclear replaced with natural gas.

ZeroGravitas 5y ago
I've bought gas from various "green" energy suppliers over the years. Generally, they need to offer it for people that need both, even if their main aim is expanding solar or wind power. Some, like this example, go a little further and try to mix in hydrogen or biogas to reduce carbon output, or offset the carbon in some way, but even when they didn't, it was still greener than the alternatives on the market and a profitable business advancing their professed agenda. I wish nuclear fans would apply their ridiculously high standards for what they consider green energy to nuclear as well rather than just sabotage any attempt at advancing renewable energy with snide gotcha arguments.
- ohgodplsno 5y ago
  Don't get me wrong: I am all for the presence of renewables in our energy mix. Solar at the individual house level is a great option, and making use of it in other spaces that are currently useless would be great. (Lining the top of parking lots to provide shade and electricity is a great option). Wind turbines are a bit more debatable, but as it stands, still provides a good option for some intermittent but good enough power. But know that your mindless antinuclearism is going to be our downfall. Our only options for baseload generation as it stands are nuclear and gas. And by protesting nuclear, you are giving oil companies a large avenue to keep fucking us all over. Rejecting nuclear at all costs right now in an attempt to get some renewable only future is madness. It is only leading us further down the hole of global warming. The only sabotage happening here is organisations like greenpeace literally committing acts of terrorism against nuclear plants. No-one wants to go nuclear+gas. Your mention of hydrogen makes you even more of a useful idiot for oil companies. Hydrogen does NOT work. We get 27% efficiency when it comes to storing it and using it as power. P2G2P is 50% at best. And while STEPs are a great solution for storage, we've used most of it. Unless you're looking to drown Bavaria to make a big lake. Build a ton of nuclear plants. Move as many countries as possible away from gas and coal. Once that's done, I'm more than happy for all of us to think of alternatives for nuclear.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

ZeroGravitas 5y ago

I've bought gas from various "green" energy suppliers over the years. Generally, they need to offer it for people that need both, even if their main aim is expanding solar or wind power. Some, like this example, go a little further and try to mix in hydrogen or biogas to reduce carbon output, or offset the carbon in some way, but even when they didn't, it was still greener than the alternatives on the market and a profitable business advancing their professed agenda. I wish nuclear fans would apply their ridiculously high standards for what they consider green energy to nuclear as well rather than just sabotage any attempt at advancing renewable energy with snide gotcha arguments.

ohgodplsno 5y ago
Don't get me wrong: I am all for the presence of renewables in our energy mix. Solar at the individual house level is a great option, and making use of it in other spaces that are currently useless would be great. (Lining the top of parking lots to provide shade and electricity is a great option). Wind turbines are a bit more debatable, but as it stands, still provides a good option for some intermittent but good enough power. But know that your mindless antinuclearism is going to be our downfall. Our only options for baseload generation as it stands are nuclear and gas. And by protesting nuclear, you are giving oil companies a large avenue to keep fucking us all over. Rejecting nuclear at all costs right now in an attempt to get some renewable only future is madness. It is only leading us further down the hole of global warming. The only sabotage happening here is organisations like greenpeace literally committing acts of terrorism against nuclear plants. No-one wants to go nuclear+gas. Your mention of hydrogen makes you even more of a useful idiot for oil companies. Hydrogen does NOT work. We get 27% efficiency when it comes to storing it and using it as power. P2G2P is 50% at best. And while STEPs are a great solution for storage, we've used most of it. Unless you're looking to drown Bavaria to make a big lake. Build a ton of nuclear plants. Move as many countries as possible away from gas and coal. Once that's done, I'm more than happy for all of us to think of alternatives for nuclear.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]