kgabis

7 ms·

61.
by kgabis 3y ago
If you *really* care about planet then you don't drive a car but use public transport and/or cycle.
62.
by kgabis 3y ago
Can the number of grains follow an S-curve?
63.
by kgabis 3y ago
You're focusing on electricity and omitting heating, transport, industry and farming.
64.
by kgabis 3y ago
That's not how per capita works.
65.
by kgabis 3y ago
Renewable energy is not the target, carbon neutrality is. German CO2 emissions per capita were only marginally better than Poland's in 2022 (8.0t vs 8.1t).
66.
by kgabis 3y ago
It sounds great until you start doing the math. We can't decarbonise without nuclear, just look at Germany. It's a poster child for renewables yet it's barely doing better than Poland (where I live). Meanwhile France is (as o
67.
by kgabis 3y ago
Yes, nuclear reactors need maintenance, but extensions to 80 years are being approved, so 80+ years doesn't seem unrealistic for existing reactors.
68.
by kgabis 3y ago
Sure, renewables+gas can be considered a baseload source of electricity. Though it's not very cheap nor carbon neutral.
69.
by kgabis 3y ago
Maybe it's better to use numbers based on generation estimate then? Comparing capacity of baseload and intermittent energy sources is very misleading.
70.
by kgabis 3y ago
What is not factored in, however, is that nuclear reactors can work for much longer than 40 years (which is a time span used by LCOE). Not to mention storage and grid extension. French reactors will have their lifetime extended beyond 60 ye
71.
by kgabis 3y ago
Capacity is not generation.
72.
by kgabis 3y ago
Germany will have to replace all of it's solar and wind capacity long before most French reactors become EOL.
73.
by kgabis 3y ago
The fact that they phased out nuclear at all is astonishing and definitely not a move in the right direction. Politics and radiophobia won.
74.
by kgabis 3y ago
New water reservoirs initially emit a lot of GHGs due to decaying organic matter, it takes decades for them to become carbon neutral.
75.
by kgabis 3y ago
Storing spent nuclear fuel is a well understood problem, we can do it safely and it doesn't put future generations at risk.
76.
by kgabis 3y ago
Not really, hydro does a lot of damage to ecosystems, blocks fish migration and can be weaponized (like it was in Ukraine during WW2 and earlier this year). And when it comes to greenhouse emissions it takes many years to offset carbon from
77.
by kgabis 3y ago
Ok, I need to double check, but I'm pretty sure using ketchup anywhere near pierogi is illegal.
78.
by kgabis 3y ago
At least in Poland private healthcare is great when it comes to simple procedures, but as soon as you have serious health issues you end up in a public hospital.
79.
by kgabis 3y ago
You're missing the cost of people not seeing a professional until it's very late into their illness and have to either undergo expensive procedures, end up disabled or die. Which is exactly what is happening in the US and is refle
80.
by kgabis 3y ago
It's quite obvious which system is better if you look at life expectancy and infant mortality.
81.
by kgabis 3y ago
Social mobility is much higher in the EU than in the US [0]. Being a millionaire in the US still doesn't guarantee that you won't go bankrupt due to a cancer treatment. [0] https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail&
82.
by kgabis 3y ago
It's even more confusing for polish speaking folks.
83.
by kgabis 3y ago
"One Ring to rule them all"
84.
by kgabis 3y ago
Your link doesn't say anything about what you proposed regarding storing energy using hydrogen and how much it's supposed to cost. LCOE assumes that nuclear plants will last for 40 years which is wildly off so yes, it favors renew
85.
by kgabis 3y ago
Is this satire? Do you realise how much plastic is used and wasted when farming and how insignificant your actions are?
86.
by kgabis 3y ago
Well, not anymore, Epic's Nanite is basically a triangle per pixel rendering.
87.
by kgabis 3y ago
What did you base your storage cost calculation on? LCOE doesn't account for nuclear running much longer than 20-40 years. And 100 years is not ludicrous, 2 units in the US have been approved to work for 80 years, 100 is not far off if
88.
by kgabis 3y ago
LCOE doesn't account for storage, grid extension necessary and for the fact that nuclear can work for 100 years but solar panels and wind turbines have to be replaced after 20-30. Also, wind and solar where? Solar and wind vary greatly
89.
by kgabis 3y ago
No it's not, there's plenty of amazingly optimized pieces of software.
90.
by kgabis 3y ago
I did that with my dji drone, figured that when I eventually crash it and it ends up in some dense foliage, I could just go back at night and look for it with my torch looking for shiny 3M reflective tape.

More ›