3 ms·
They should have built renewables and they would have cheaper energy than ever. You can't remove energy sources without replacement.
by tcfhgj 3y ago
They should have built renewables and they would have cheaper energy than ever. You can't remove energy sources without replacement.
- KptMarchewa 3y agoBuild renewables in 1987?
- vidanay 3y agoA couple billion solar panels operating at ~1% efficiency sounds like the best plan ever.
- purpleflame1257 3y agoApart from the base load arguments, in the 1980s and 90s, solar was a total joke efficiency and cost-wise
- jonkoops 3y agoIn any real case they should have both built out renewable energy and maintain and even expand the existing fleet of nuclear reactors. Nuclear might be historically expensive and storage an issue, but it is carbon free, and for the moment that is the most important problem we need to solve.
- sph 3y agoAdditionally to what the sibling commenters say, we don't have a lot of sun nor wind in the Po Valley, where most of the industries are, and please point me to any G7 country that produces most of their energy from hydroelectricity, which Northern Italy has a decent potential for. Renewables are just now starting to become economically viable, but distribution is still an unsolved problem. The wind farms in Sardinia are not gonna power Milan.