4 ms·

BANANAs in action, can't even build a green energy facility in the literal middle of nowhere without complaints.

by thereisnospork 2y ago

ok_dad 2y ago
It’s an industrial plant with an attached power plant, it’s not like families will be using this power.
- thereisnospork 2y ago
  How is it you think families get power, goods, and services? Ammonia makes fertilizer - this plant will help feed millions, dropping food costs. Even if the power this plant is generating won't go directly to families, it will be going into the things they eat and the things they buy in place of power they can use directly.
  - exe34 2y ago
    is this the last place on earth to build that kind of industry?
    - daedrdev 2y ago
      I think its fair enough to not build it here, but everywhere there will be arguments made against all projects so it can get old fast
  - saddat 2y ago
    Again, not much use for the locals at this elevation . That’s super dry area
fnordpiglet 2y ago
It’s nothing to do with the merits of the project itself but that it would destroy a singular planetary resource.
- fastball 2y ago
  It's not "destroyed". If a dire need for dark skies arises, you can always... turn the lights off.
  - justlikereddit 2y ago
    Turn the windmills off too because turbulence. Actually turn the entire facility off because again being a hotspot causes turbulence. Why don't we build an all night biker bar next door to your home? It won't cause you any problems like noise or nuisance because they cal always turn off the music or keep closed all night?
    - fastball 2y ago
      Energy for the many is more important than astronomy for the few. Hopefully in the future we have more robust energy production (this is a great example of why green energy proponents need to support nuclear – it has far fewer externalities like this) and then we can reclaim the area for astronomical use. That is my point. Nothing is actually destroyed, unlike with other types of pollution. Light pollution is literally the most reversible disruption I can think of. "Destroy" is definitely the wrong verb, unless your goal is for people to ignore you due to histrionics.
      - oldherl 2y ago
        The problem is that the industrial project will attract more people to the site, and a new town would be built with families living there. So even in the imagined best scenario, when you shut down this project, lots of people would lose their jobs. They would have to do some other businesses to support themselves. The light pollution won't be eliminated.
        fastball 2y ago
        Actually, in my imagined best scenario, we would develop better means of producing energy that make a solar farm in the middle of the desert less attractive, causing working there to become less lucrative and encouraging people to find new jobs. The megaproject winds down naturally due to that changing economic landscape (like how I expect the town where I grew up in Texas to die when the oilfield workers no longer frequent it), and the dark zone is reclaimed for astronomy or whatever.
culi 2y ago
This isn't just about getting rid of the last place on earth you can sometimes get a truly dark sky. This is about progress itself > Since its inauguration in 1999, Paranal Observatory, built and operated by the European Southern Observatory (ESO), has led to significant astronomy breakthroughs, such as the first image of an exoplanet and confirming the accelerated expansion of the Universe. The Nobel Prize in Physics in 2020 was awarded for research on the supermassive black hole at the centre of the Milky Way, in which Paranal telescopes were instrumental. The observatory is a key asset for astronomers worldwide, including those in Chile, which has seen its astronomical community grow substantially in the last decades. Additionally, the nearby Cerro Armazones hosts the construction of ESO’s Extremely Large Telescope (ELT), the world’s biggest telescope of its kind — a revolutionary facility that will dramatically change what we know about our Universe.
- modeless 2y ago
  It's not literally the last place on Earth with dark skies. It's just one place with dark skies where they built a telescope. This isn't about protecting the sky and it's not about "progress", it's about protecting an investment of money in a telescope. The price of launching giant telescopes to space is set to plummet in the next few years with Starship and New Glenn coming online. IMO we should be focusing on that rather than blocking development on Earth to preserve previous investments in ground based telescopes.
  - phinnaeus 2y ago
    Launching telescopes is not a viable alternative to ground based telescopes. They are completely different scales. We would need large scale orbital construction facilities or a space elevator to bridge that gap. We don’t need to develop every square inch of the planet to support humanity, we don’t take up that much space.
  - SiempreViernes 2y ago
    No, but it's one of three places on Earth that have dark skies this good. The fact you don't know Paranal host many more than "one telescope" doesn't surprise me, as your are obviously very ignorant of modern astronomy.
SiempreViernes 2y ago
5 km from infrastructure critical to Chilean science isn't really "nowhere".

BANANAs in action, can't even build a green energy facility in the literal middle of nowhere without complaints.

ok_dad 2y ago

It’s an industrial plant with an attached power plant, it’s not like families will be using this power.

thereisnospork 2y ago
How is it you think families get power, goods, and services? Ammonia makes fertilizer - this plant will help feed millions, dropping food costs. Even if the power this plant is generating won't go directly to families, it will be going into the things they eat and the things they buy in place of power they can use directly.
- exe34 2y ago
  is this the last place on earth to build that kind of industry?
  - daedrdev 2y ago
    I think its fair enough to not build it here, but everywhere there will be arguments made against all projects so it can get old fast
- saddat 2y ago
  Again, not much use for the locals at this elevation . That’s super dry area

fnordpiglet 2y ago

It’s nothing to do with the merits of the project itself but that it would destroy a singular planetary resource.

fastball 2y ago
It's not "destroyed". If a dire need for dark skies arises, you can always... turn the lights off.
- justlikereddit 2y ago
  Turn the windmills off too because turbulence. Actually turn the entire facility off because again being a hotspot causes turbulence. Why don't we build an all night biker bar next door to your home? It won't cause you any problems like noise or nuisance because they cal always turn off the music or keep closed all night?
  - fastball 2y ago
    Energy for the many is more important than astronomy for the few. Hopefully in the future we have more robust energy production (this is a great example of why green energy proponents need to support nuclear – it has far fewer externalities like this) and then we can reclaim the area for astronomical use. That is my point. Nothing is actually destroyed, unlike with other types of pollution. Light pollution is literally the most reversible disruption I can think of. "Destroy" is definitely the wrong verb, unless your goal is for people to ignore you due to histrionics.
    - oldherl 2y ago
      The problem is that the industrial project will attract more people to the site, and a new town would be built with families living there. So even in the imagined best scenario, when you shut down this project, lots of people would lose their jobs. They would have to do some other businesses to support themselves. The light pollution won't be eliminated.
      - fastball 2y ago
        Actually, in my imagined best scenario, we would develop better means of producing energy that make a solar farm in the middle of the desert less attractive, causing working there to become less lucrative and encouraging people to find new jobs. The megaproject winds down naturally due to that changing economic landscape (like how I expect the town where I grew up in Texas to die when the oilfield workers no longer frequent it), and the dark zone is reclaimed for astronomy or whatever.

culi 2y ago

This isn't just about getting rid of the last place on earth you can sometimes get a truly dark sky. This is about progress itself > Since its inauguration in 1999, Paranal Observatory, built and operated by the European Southern Observatory (ESO), has led to significant astronomy breakthroughs, such as the first image of an exoplanet and confirming the accelerated expansion of the Universe. The Nobel Prize in Physics in 2020 was awarded for research on the supermassive black hole at the centre of the Milky Way, in which Paranal telescopes were instrumental. The observatory is a key asset for astronomers worldwide, including those in Chile, which has seen its astronomical community grow substantially in the last decades. Additionally, the nearby Cerro Armazones hosts the construction of ESO’s Extremely Large Telescope (ELT), the world’s biggest telescope of its kind — a revolutionary facility that will dramatically change what we know about our Universe.

modeless 2y ago
It's not literally the last place on Earth with dark skies. It's just one place with dark skies where they built a telescope. This isn't about protecting the sky and it's not about "progress", it's about protecting an investment of money in a telescope. The price of launching giant telescopes to space is set to plummet in the next few years with Starship and New Glenn coming online. IMO we should be focusing on that rather than blocking development on Earth to preserve previous investments in ground based telescopes.
- phinnaeus 2y ago
  Launching telescopes is not a viable alternative to ground based telescopes. They are completely different scales. We would need large scale orbital construction facilities or a space elevator to bridge that gap. We don’t need to develop every square inch of the planet to support humanity, we don’t take up that much space.
- SiempreViernes 2y ago
  No, but it's one of three places on Earth that have dark skies this good. The fact you don't know Paranal host many more than "one telescope" doesn't surprise me, as your are obviously very ignorant of modern astronomy.

SiempreViernes 2y ago

5 km from infrastructure critical to Chilean science isn't really "nowhere".