3 ms·
Backed into a corner? This thread basically started with "Portugal ran on 100% renewables"... Sobat least for one point in time, it is possible. There are two
by hef19898 3y ago
Backed into a corner? This thread basically started with "Portugal ran on 100% renewables"... Sobat least for one point in time, it is possible.
There are two options now: Take it from there and figure out options to make that one point in time sustainable all the time (requires real engineering and creativity, and time and money). Or throw our hands up, blame environmentalists for shuting down nuclear plants (which wasn't always environmentalists, nor did we ever have enough nuclear plants to begin with). Guess which approach gives us a way forward?
- epups 3y ago> Backed into a corner? This thread basically started with "Portugal ran on 100% renewables"... Sobat least for one point in time, it is possible. Sure, but that's not sustainable, as the numbers on the parent comment clearly indicate. From that perspective, what gives us a way forward is acknowledging that headlines such as these are meaningless in the grand scheme of things, and trying to design an energy strategy that is compatible with the facts at hand.
- hef19898 3y agoThis strategy already exists so: more renewables, heat pumps for heating, EVs, green hydrogen, flatten peak demand by making industrial demand more flexible. That strategy actually does work, it requires a ton of investment, and time, to scale so. Throw in existing nuclear as stop gap solution. Besides being contrarian, which I get because I have the same tendencies, what would be your alternative? Not doing anything is obviously bad, new nuclear power plants take too long to build and are too expensive (all numbers prove that). So? Any other ideas?