kgabis

9 ms·

91.
by kgabis 3y ago
And after decoding and translating it starts with "We're no strangers to love..."
92.
by kgabis 3y ago
All right, but apart from that, what have the Romans ever done for us? /s
93.
by kgabis 3y ago
Those things don't add up - there's often no wind, no sun, no hydro. Energy storage is also orders of magnitude too small to store reasonable amounts of energy. I would argue we should start with the cleanest source of energy (whi
94.
by kgabis 3y ago
Renewables alone won't let us decarbonise, they are too expensive and intermittent. We need lots of nuclear if we want to stand a chance.
95.
by kgabis 3y ago
We also have this thing called night, as well as weather and seasons.
96.
by kgabis 3y ago
Of course nuclear generates less waste than intermittent sources like solar or wind. Nuclear occupies orders of magnitude less land, requires less concrete, steel, copper, aluminium. And it's still comparing apples to oranges since nuc
97.
by kgabis 3y ago
Do we even have enough copper to pull that off?
98.
by kgabis 3y ago
I don't care who's been running Germany, never said anything about greens, I don't know why you're so obsessed about it. I only wanted to correct your statements about nuclear not being a viable option.
99.
by kgabis 3y ago
Nuclear was responsible for 30% of electricity generation in 1990, a bit more than 6%. And yes, you just store the waste in geologically stable rocks, it's not rocket science, we store other types of radioactive or toxic waste and it&#
100.
by kgabis 3y ago
> Nuclear is and was never a viable option. While fans of this technology are repeating it over and over, the German reactors were EOL. Also: The energy companies were only able to run those reactors because that has been subsidized in d
101.
by kgabis 3y ago
Do they? Tetrapak is "14% plastic sheets, 5% aluminium, 6% from a bio-plastic cap and 75% cardboard". Putting things in yellow bin doesn't mean that they won't be incinerated, majority of plastics either gets burned or e
102.
by kgabis 3y ago
Other than not having to use diacritics, what benefits does it present for modern Polish users to switch to an alphabet designed for Old Church Slavonic?
103.
by kgabis 3y ago
I wouldn't be so sure about plastic, cartons have plastic lining and caps. From ecological standpoint bags seem to make much more sense because they use fewer resources (just a bit of oil for plastic, no cutting of trees required), it&
104.
by kgabis 3y ago
I see this argument raised quite often and it's a bit like saying English should have it's own alphabet because latin alphabet wasn't made for whatever amalgamate of languages modern English is. There are cultural factors at
105.
by kgabis 3y ago
https://kgdev.pl/scanplay/new It's a NES-tanks inspired browser game where you use your phone as a controller. It's built for local multiplayer sessions and includes a simple level editor (levels are encoded
106.
by kgabis 3y ago
We do have a solution - just bury it underground. And the best part is: it gets safer with time!
107.
by kgabis 3y ago
Forest are far too valuable to just burn them, we should do everything we can to save ecosystems that are threatened by global warming. The obvious answer is more nuclear because it's by far the least intrusive source of energy.
108.
by kgabis 3y ago
It wasn't a necessity. If Russia/Soviet Union was trying to delay the German invasion then they shouldn't have trained German troops and sent natural resources for it's war machine.
109.
by kgabis 3y ago
Not really and not really.
110.
by kgabis 3y ago
Is there any headset with a long focal distance? Even dumb glasses that simulate looking outside would be really useful in some work environments.
111.
by kgabis 3y ago
Good thing solar panels appear out of thin air and don't need any mining to be manufactured.
112.
by kgabis 3y ago
This is simply not true.
113.
by kgabis 4y ago
It's quite ironic that AI will be inherently human in it's unreliability.
114.
by kgabis 4y ago
German grid must be very low in terms of CO2 emissions then, right? Not just marginally better than neighbouring Poland?
115.
by kgabis 4y ago
Lazard doesn't account for energy storage and grid expansion so it shouldn't be used to compare intermittent and baseload energy sources. If there's political will NPPs can be and are constructed on time, like in ROK, PRC or
116.
by kgabis 4y ago
Your assessment of nuclear power is completely wrong. Nuclear is the cheapest, most sustainable and widely supported source of clean electricity. Even in Germany more people support nuclear power than oppose it.
117.
by kgabis 4y ago
It just doesn't make sense to only use LCOE for weather and season dependent sources of energy, of course you need storage if you don't want to burn gas/coal during Dunkelflaute. Just look at German grid and what's happe
118.
by kgabis 4y ago
LCOE doesn't account for storage, backup and grid costs, please don't use it as a go to indicator that renewables are cheap. How much offshore capacity was added in the last 3 years in Germany? Zero? Or am I mistaken?
119.
by kgabis 4y ago
Per capita per gdp it's 70% higher than France. Going 50% renewables was a huge undertaking but it's clear it wasn't the right thing to do considering this money could've been spent on building more nuclear. It's al
120.
by kgabis 4y ago
What fruits? German co2 emissions per capital are similar to coal heavy Poland. Energiewende is a massive failure and a great example of politics screwing people and environment over.

More ›