3 ms·

And the Green Party in Belgium, which had the audacity to say natural gas is necessary to transition from nuclear to renewables. The cognitive dissonance is inc

by sofixa 4y ago

And the Green Party in Belgium, which had the audacity to say natural gas is necessary to transition from nuclear to renewables. The cognitive dissonance is incredible.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago
I don't know the details of whatever claim you are disputing, but basically all sensible plans include some natural gas burning in the short term. As has France with their nuclear fleet. So mocking a Green Party for being factually correct, pragmatic and effective in achieving their aims seems a bit cheap. Sometimes feels like people only like nuclear because it lets them talk smack about Greens. Who are generally well educated people with sensible ideas. So why are we attacking them again?
- the_biot 4y ago
  Indeed, we simply can't do without non-renewables at the moment, nobody can. Just wait until everybody really does have a ton of renewable energy, and you get headlines like "<area> ran on 100% renewables all week!", and thus it seems obvious we don't need the gas plants anymore. Except, that is, for when there's no wind or sun, then you absolutely need them. But why would companies keep those plants going, when most of the time nobody buys energy off them? They'll just shut them down, since they'd just lose money keeping them online -- resulting in massive outages at times without wind/sun. Meaning the government will have to subsidize carbon-belching gas plants just to keep them open.
  - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
    We already have gas plants that only run for short periods of time. So there's no need to build more or shut down the existing ones. The important part is to stop burning fossil fuels and venting the CO2. Which is most quickly done by installing renewables and not running the existing gas plants. I have no real objection to paying money to firms that keep gas plants ready for use. It's the money going to the people who sell the gas that I fret about. And again, the quickest way to reduce that flow is building more renewables, now.
    - the_biot 4y ago
      > I have no real objection to paying money to firms that keep gas plants ready for use Yeah well, you're one of the good ones then. I expect that to be a real test of faith for greens and small-government liberals both.

by sofixa 4y ago

And the Green Party in Belgium, which had the audacity to say natural gas is necessary to transition from nuclear to renewables. The cognitive dissonance is incredible.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago

I don't know the details of whatever claim you are disputing, but basically all sensible plans include some natural gas burning in the short term. As has France with their nuclear fleet. So mocking a Green Party for being factually correct, pragmatic and effective in achieving their aims seems a bit cheap. Sometimes feels like people only like nuclear because it lets them talk smack about Greens. Who are generally well educated people with sensible ideas. So why are we attacking them again?

the_biot 4y ago
Indeed, we simply can't do without non-renewables at the moment, nobody can. Just wait until everybody really does have a ton of renewable energy, and you get headlines like "<area> ran on 100% renewables all week!", and thus it seems obvious we don't need the gas plants anymore. Except, that is, for when there's no wind or sun, then you absolutely need them. But why would companies keep those plants going, when most of the time nobody buys energy off them? They'll just shut them down, since they'd just lose money keeping them online -- resulting in massive outages at times without wind/sun. Meaning the government will have to subsidize carbon-belching gas plants just to keep them open.
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  We already have gas plants that only run for short periods of time. So there's no need to build more or shut down the existing ones. The important part is to stop burning fossil fuels and venting the CO2. Which is most quickly done by installing renewables and not running the existing gas plants. I have no real objection to paying money to firms that keep gas plants ready for use. It's the money going to the people who sell the gas that I fret about. And again, the quickest way to reduce that flow is building more renewables, now.
  - the_biot 4y ago
    > I have no real objection to paying money to firms that keep gas plants ready for use Yeah well, you're one of the good ones then. I expect that to be a real test of faith for greens and small-government liberals both.