6 ms·
> What, you think there's some inherent limit on the number of factories that can be built? No, but there are limits on the amount of raw materials that said f
by xienze 4y ago
> What, you think there's some inherent limit on the number of factories that can be built?
No, but there are limits on the amount of raw materials that said factories can use to produce equipment.
- pfdietz 4y agoWhich raw material are you talking about? Be specific. I believe a global renewable energy system can be constructed using only elements available in essentially unlimited amounts, and using those elements at a modest scale compared to industrial society as a whole.
- xienze 4y ago> Which raw material are you talking about? Be specific. Uh Lithium?
- pfdietz 4y agoIt's as if you think Li-ion batteries are the only kind that can exist. This is a generic problem with anti-renewable arguments: they argue against specific technologies rather than the entire class of possible technologies. (And then they go and posit all sorts of as-yet unbuilt reactor types, blithely ignoring the irony.)
- ncmncm 4y agoBatteries will be only a negligible fraction of utility storage, and a negligible fraction of those will be lithium. Lithium is the most expensive storage. Utilities will choose the cheaper among many alternatives, not the most expensive; the which is why they are not building nukes.
- epistasis 4y agoThe lithium is there, it just needs capital investment. Ironically ESG has guided capital away from extractive industries like this. It's not a physical limitation, it's a timing of scaling limitation, and we haven't hit it in a hard way yet. Plenty of new lithium resources, and more being discovered all the time.