4 ms·

It makes sense to run coal for another 5-10 years if you can to transition to batteries. This will likely put more stress on the parts and the plant will become

It makes sense to run coal for another 5-10 years if you can to transition to batteries. This will likely put more stress on the parts and the plant will become unserviceable sooner but that’s better then retiring it now

worik 2y ago
> It makes sense to run coal for another 5-10 years No, it does not. It is a bad idea. We are better to do without the electricity. Inconvenience, or climate meltdown. Take your pick
- ars 2y ago
  Do that and all support for the environment goes completely out the window. Do this and that's pretty much the end for any kind of green transition.
  - immibis 2y ago
    Is this a valid generic political argument? Do the bad thing or the bad people will support your bad opposition and do the bad thing anyway? No wonder there's so much bad.
    - 7952 2y ago
      The problem is that there is no agreement on what bad actually is. An individual may consider that a loss of their job is worse than global climate change. The environmental sphere is full of arguments that would ideally be a false dichotomy but are not. Politics is the mechanism we have for deciding what is bad. It isn't very good but it is the best we have.
    - nothercastle 2y ago
      Absolutely extreme environmental policy alienates most moderates. Shut it down and have poor people freeze or die from heat isn’t going to win a lot of moderate support
      - immibis 2y ago
        Then the winning strategy is to make the opposite side appear as extreme as possible and alienate moderates.
- nothercastle 2y ago
  The pollution doesn’t go away it just happens somewhere else with fewer regulations and less filters like China or Bangladesh. All that happens is that Australia uses more expensive nat gas power and the coal gets exported elsewhere. Also keep in mind that there is pretty extensive pollution created by manufacturing a power plant in the first place. It’s often more environmentally sound to use up existing facilities even if they are a bit dirtier than to build brands new ones

worik 2y ago

> It makes sense to run coal for another 5-10 years No, it does not. It is a bad idea. We are better to do without the electricity. Inconvenience, or climate meltdown. Take your pick

ars 2y ago
Do that and all support for the environment goes completely out the window. Do this and that's pretty much the end for any kind of green transition.
- immibis 2y ago
  Is this a valid generic political argument? Do the bad thing or the bad people will support your bad opposition and do the bad thing anyway? No wonder there's so much bad.
  - 7952 2y ago
    The problem is that there is no agreement on what bad actually is. An individual may consider that a loss of their job is worse than global climate change. The environmental sphere is full of arguments that would ideally be a false dichotomy but are not. Politics is the mechanism we have for deciding what is bad. It isn't very good but it is the best we have.
  - nothercastle 2y ago
    Absolutely extreme environmental policy alienates most moderates. Shut it down and have poor people freeze or die from heat isn’t going to win a lot of moderate support
    - immibis 2y ago
      Then the winning strategy is to make the opposite side appear as extreme as possible and alienate moderates.
nothercastle 2y ago
The pollution doesn’t go away it just happens somewhere else with fewer regulations and less filters like China or Bangladesh. All that happens is that Australia uses more expensive nat gas power and the coal gets exported elsewhere. Also keep in mind that there is pretty extensive pollution created by manufacturing a power plant in the first place. It’s often more environmentally sound to use up existing facilities even if they are a bit dirtier than to build brands new ones