3 ms·

Citation needed. I will save you the trouble because I already know where your numbers come from: the Quadrennial Technology Review by the US Department of Ene

Citation needed. I will save you the trouble because I already know where your numbers come from: the Quadrennial Technology Review by the US Department of Energy from around 10 years ago. These numbers have been thoroughly debunked [1]. They are simply wrong, likely out of laziness more than malice. But the people that spread this around do it out of malice to dupe people and influence opinions. You've been duped. [1] https://xcancel.com/simonahac/status/1318711842907123712 https://xcancel.com/simonahac/status/1318711842907123712

mpweiher 1y ago
> I already know where your numbers come from: the Quadrennial Technology Review by the US Department of Energy from around 10 years ago. That turns out not to be the case. Even if it were the case: an official study by the DOE was "thoroughly debunked", in your esteemed opinion, because some random Australian twitter user claims to have talked to a friend. Right.
- locallost 1y ago
  He claims no such things. Instead he goes deep down the rabbit hole, brings back receipts and takes no prisoners. Citation still needed. Real one will not come as it's nonsense.
  - mpweiher 1y ago
    > He claims no such things. Literally: "i asked a solar developer." https://x.com/simonahac/status/1318711817502302209 https://x.com/simonahac/status/1318711817502302209 > Citation still needed. Real one will not come as it's nonsense. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2542435123000016 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S254243512...