4 ms·
No, our dependence on fossil fuels to product energy is harming our planet. I feel like it’s long past time we reinvest in nuclear energy. It’s the one thing we
by rzz3 4y ago
No, our dependence on fossil fuels to product energy is harming our planet. I feel like it’s long past time we reinvest in nuclear energy. It’s the one thing we can do to significantly reduce fossil fuel consumption over the next decade.
- trixie_ 4y agoIt's amazing how even today most rooftops don't have solar panels. We have the technology and resources to solve our energy problems, the only thing missing is the policy.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago> even today most rooftops don't have solar panels I'm installing rooftop solar. It makes me feel good. Its output is an order of magnitude more expensive than utility-scale solar behind the meter. The solution has to be renewables + storage + zero-carbon baseload, i.e. nuclear. Everything else, including calls for rooftop solar, is a distraction.
- SamReidHughes 4y agoRooftop solar isn't cost-efficient, or Walmart would be putting solar on its roofs instead of just virtue signaling with it in the parking lot. (Apologies to whoever I took this from.) Edit: (You might say, isn't cost-efficient yet. For all I know parking shade structures could have turned the corner already; they used to require tax incentives to break even.)
- jogjayr 4y agoThe Walmart near me here in Canada has rooftop solar.
- dragonwriter 4y ago> Rooftop solar isn't cost-efficient, or Walmart would be putting solar on its roofs instead of just virtue signaling with it in the parking lot. (Apologies to whoever I took this from.) Walmart has more parking lot space than roof space, and parking lot solar doubles as covered parking, which itself has value. Even if both were cost effective, it makes sense to do parking lot first (with accompanying PR) and then rooftop later (with another round of PR).
- Gigachad 4y agoSomething must be different in Australia. I live in a highrise and when I look down, almost every single building, residential, office space, government, even schools, they all have solar on the roof. Almost every home owner has solar on their roof as well. It’s basically just rental properties without.
- SamReidHughes 4y agoIt's subsidized.
- trixie_ 4y agoIf there were a cost for pumping pollution into the atmosphere required to generate electricity then that cost would be passed on to you the consumer and then it might be 'cost-efficient' to install solar. Like I said, the problem is policy.
- SamReidHughes 4y agoAs some other commenter mentioned, rooftop solar can be compared against other deployments of solar power.
- jotm 4y agoIt's even more amazing how most rooftops aren't painted white/silver/reflective. Just because it looks ugly.
- pkdpic 4y agoYeah this smells like the "people don't recycle enough" narrative, pointing the blame away from bloated / vestigial 20th century industry.
- Proven 4y ago
- kova12 4y agoSolution was there many decades ago. Yet look at the state of nuclear energy now: plants are being closed instead of new ones being built. This is so annoyingly hypocritical. People who manufactured the crisis are now pushing onto us non-solutions to ensure we end up with neither energy nor environment
- fulafel 4y agoTrying to reduce fossil fuel use by outcrowding it with various things is like pushing with a string. Especially as we are used to using underpriced energy very wastefully. Fatal, megadeath (or even giga-) inducing amounts of easily accessible fossil fuels will be pumped and dug out of the ground unless it's just regulated down. Yes we need other forms of energy production, but it's suicidal to try to just use them in this supply-pushing way, we don't have time to faff around with that.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- RektBoy 4y agoPeople are harming the planet...extinction is only solution. Clearly you never talked with any Austrian. Mention nuclear energy and you will be compared to Hitler. EU is on the bring to mark nuclear energy as non-green, what then?