3 ms·

> Instead of paying to buy wind and solar plants Have you considered googling and checking your assumptions? May help clear up the cynical misunderstandings yo

by yunohn 2y ago

> Instead of paying to buy wind and solar plants Have you considered googling and checking your assumptions? May help clear up the cynical misunderstandings you appear to have. If you had, you would’ve read that both Microsoft and Google invest heavily into wind and solar, and that Google is the largest corporate purchaser of renewables in the world. I’m not advocating for these companies, just trying to show that tech is one of the few industries that does actually care and invest into clean energy. Some sources: - https://www.gstatic.com/gumdrop/sustainability/google-2024-environmental-report.pdf https://www.gstatic.com/gumdrop/sustainability/google-2024-e... - https://www.latitudemedia.com/news/googles-largest-wind-investment-to-date-targets-clean-cloud-products https://www.latitudemedia.com/news/googles-largest-wind-inve... - https://amp.theguardian.com/technology/2019/sep/20/google-says-its-energy-deals-will-lead-to-2bn-wind-and-solar-investment https://amp.theguardian.com/technology/2019/sep/20/google-sa... - https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/2/24147153/microsoft-ai-data-center-record-renewable-energy-purchase https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/2/24147153/microsoft-ai-data...

_aavaa_ 2y ago
> Have you considered googling and checking your assumptions? May help clear up the cynical misunderstandings you appear to have. I don't have any such misunderstanding. Perhaps consider seeing my original comment which links to an article describing Google building out solar and wind farms for its data centres. My cynicism, which I argue is well founded, is based around tech companies signing such agreements with nuclear companies, especially when it involves doings things that have never been done before (restarting reactors and building economical SMRs, see Nuscale...). All these agreements are likely to amount to nothing more than positive PR, greenwashing, or predatory delay. Yes, they also build out solar and wind, but their nuclear PPAs are given equal standing with projects which actually are likely to be built; so instead of having to build more solar and wind today for more real money, they can promise to buy nuclear tomorrow for no cost today.
- yunohn 2y ago
  Not one of your comments amidst this sprawling thread has a single positive fact in it. You’re blindly arguing “nuclear bad” and claiming that nuclear PPAs amount to nothing based on zero evidence? The ones we’re all discussing are the first of their kind… Anyways, it’s been a bore, cheers!

by yunohn 2y ago

_aavaa_ 2y ago

> Have you considered googling and checking your assumptions? May help clear up the cynical misunderstandings you appear to have. I don't have any such misunderstanding. Perhaps consider seeing my original comment which links to an article describing Google building out solar and wind farms for its data centres. My cynicism, which I argue is well founded, is based around tech companies signing such agreements with nuclear companies, especially when it involves doings things that have never been done before (restarting reactors and building economical SMRs, see Nuscale...). All these agreements are likely to amount to nothing more than positive PR, greenwashing, or predatory delay. Yes, they also build out solar and wind, but their nuclear PPAs are given equal standing with projects which actually are likely to be built; so instead of having to build more solar and wind today for more real money, they can promise to buy nuclear tomorrow for no cost today.

yunohn 2y ago
Not one of your comments amidst this sprawling thread has a single positive fact in it. You’re blindly arguing “nuclear bad” and claiming that nuclear PPAs amount to nothing based on zero evidence? The ones we’re all discussing are the first of their kind… Anyways, it’s been a bore, cheers!