3 ms·
There's a lot of bad thinking in that one sentence. All or nothing. We must have completely clean power or it has no value. Not using comparison. How does it
by 99_00 4y ago
There's a lot of bad thinking in that one sentence.
All or nothing. We must have completely clean power or it has no value.
Not using comparison. How does it compare to other sources of energy, (including solar which is built in facilities using coal power).
- zitterbewegung 4y agoFission is much cleaner than coal power plants in the Nuclear isotopes that are released into the air and we can contain nuclear waste pretty well.
- ncmncm 4y agoCoal is on its way out, so is not a sensible standard of comparison.
- JimTheMan 4y agoAt some point, we will have enough solar/hydro/wind etc that they won't be built using coal power... Right now it's a necessary yes, in the future no. In a way, that last (...) is also a very black and white way of viewing things.
- 99_00 4y ago>In a way In what way is it black and white view of things? Solar energy production is not 100% clean. It never will be regardless if coal is used or not. That doesn't mean it's bad. The goal isn't purely clean energy. The goal is improved sources of energy. Hopefully coal isn't used in the future. But things don't appear to be on track. https://www.carbonbrief.org/china-briefing-17-march-2022-beijing-doubling-down-on-fossil-fuels-chinas-co2-emissions-increase-coal-production-growth/ https://www.carbonbrief.org/china-briefing-17-march-2022-bei... Unfortunately, because black and white thinking and evaluating energy sources without comparing them has resulted in a shortage of natural gas (thanks to fossil fuel divestment and ESG) and energy producers falling back to coal. The worst possible source of energy.
- c7DJTLrn 4y agoIt's just shit popsci journalism. Better off reading The Register.