The problem with renewable energies is that they're just not reliable enough.
-
The problem with renewable energies is that they're just not reliable enough.
Where is your wind and solar power supposed to come from now that the strait of Hormuz is blocked?
@schratze excellent toot
-
The problem with renewable energies is that they're just not reliable enough.
Where is your wind and solar power supposed to come from now that the strait of Hormuz is blocked?
@schratze you wanted to say "they're not reliable enough in increasing the profits of shady regimes through manufactured crises"?
-
The problem with renewable energies is that they're just not reliable enough.
Where is your wind and solar power supposed to come from now that the strait of Hormuz is blocked?
@schratze I'm putting a 10% tax on wind!
-
The problem with renewable energies is that they're just not reliable enough.
Where is your wind and solar power supposed to come from now that the strait of Hormuz is blocked?
@schratze I hear that some companies are starting to offshore their wind turbines though.
-
@schratze I'm putting a 10% tax on wind!
@odr_k4tana @schratze We've got to put a stop to all this cheap foreign sunlight that is flooding into the country.
-
The problem with renewable energies is that they're just not reliable enough.
Where is your wind and solar power supposed to come from now that the strait of Hormuz is blocked?
@schratze the problem with energy, whether renewable or fossil, is not so much its production (i.e., generation, storage, transmission, and distribution) but rather our insatiable consumption of it.
-
The problem with renewable energies is that they're just not reliable enough.
Where is your wind and solar power supposed to come from now that the strait of Hormuz is blocked?
@schratze Space, with the delivery ayyylmaos -
@iwein @emily_s @gardengeek @schratze Nevertheless the share of China's energy that comes from coal is declining fast and will continue to do so
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-energy-source-sub?country=~CHN
Furthermore, some of the new coal plants replace older inefficient ones and produce fewer emissions.
One would almost think the Chinese have expected trouble in t' gulf and planned accordingly.
@samueljohnson@mstdn.social @iwein@mas.to @emily_s@mastodon.me.uk @gardengeek@mstdn.social @schratze@todon.nl Those powerplants do have a limited lifespan.
If they’re all coming due basically the same time, then the VC’s observation can be correct and misleading.
-
@samueljohnson@mstdn.social @iwein@mas.to @emily_s@mastodon.me.uk @gardengeek@mstdn.social @schratze@todon.nl Those powerplants do have a limited lifespan.
If they’re all coming due basically the same time, then the VC’s observation can be correct and misleading.
@lispi314 @emily_s @gardengeek @samueljohnson @schratze lots of interesting observations thanks. To hopefully unconfuse: the only important metric is the absolute number for fossils. If that doesn't come down we're fucked.
It's going up, globally, at record rates, also for China.
My guess is that the main reason for this detail is that we're outsourcing production to China, instead of consuming less, and another wild guess is the main culprits still are cement and steel.
-
@lispi314 @emily_s @gardengeek @samueljohnson @schratze lots of interesting observations thanks. To hopefully unconfuse: the only important metric is the absolute number for fossils. If that doesn't come down we're fucked.
It's going up, globally, at record rates, also for China.
My guess is that the main reason for this detail is that we're outsourcing production to China, instead of consuming less, and another wild guess is the main culprits still are cement and steel.
@iwein@mas.to @emily_s@mastodon.me.uk @gardengeek@mstdn.social @samueljohnson@mstdn.social @schratze@todon.nl
the only important metric is the absolute number for fossils.
Then I suppose you can thank the USA for their recent war. That’s going to accelerate divestment of fossil fuels in a lot of places.
Price will have doubled before long and won’t go down nearly as fast. That changes a lot of calculations on switchover.
-
@iwein@mas.to @emily_s@mastodon.me.uk @gardengeek@mstdn.social @samueljohnson@mstdn.social @schratze@todon.nl
the only important metric is the absolute number for fossils.
Then I suppose you can thank the USA for their recent war. That’s going to accelerate divestment of fossil fuels in a lot of places.
Price will have doubled before long and won’t go down nearly as fast. That changes a lot of calculations on switchover.
@lispi314 there's always some asshole I can blame, I'm sure. And the #epsteinClass are usually excellent targets for that.
But today I'll just plant some trees first
-
@iwein @emily_s @gardengeek @schratze Nevertheless the share of China's energy that comes from coal is declining fast and will continue to do so
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-energy-source-sub?country=~CHN
Furthermore, some of the new coal plants replace older inefficient ones and produce fewer emissions.
One would almost think the Chinese have expected trouble in t' gulf and planned accordingly.
@samueljohnson@mstdn.social @iwein@mas.to @emily_s@mastodon.me.uk @gardengeek@mstdn.social @schratze@todon.nl
One would almost think the Chinese have expected trouble in t’ gulf and planned accordingly.
They probably expected it from literally all major sources of fossil fuels not within their borders.
I would feel comfortable speculating the turn to solar is long-term strategy for decoupling internal stability from external shenanigans.
They would also very well know the downsides of coal-based generation on health & such.
-
@lispi314 @emily_s @gardengeek @samueljohnson @schratze lots of interesting observations thanks. To hopefully unconfuse: the only important metric is the absolute number for fossils. If that doesn't come down we're fucked.
It's going up, globally, at record rates, also for China.
My guess is that the main reason for this detail is that we're outsourcing production to China, instead of consuming less, and another wild guess is the main culprits still are cement and steel.
@iwein @lispi314 @emily_s @gardengeek @schratze True. The rapid growth of renewables is our only hope and is happening, with predictions being exceeded every year. It's not Game Over yet, and there's some chance that current conflicts will further accelerate the transition.
If cement industry was a country it would rank 7th for emissions (Economist some yrs ago). EU's CBAM should help w some of the diversion to China and others will need to follow. US insanity will (must) be unsustained.
-
@iwein @lispi314 @emily_s @gardengeek @schratze True. The rapid growth of renewables is our only hope and is happening, with predictions being exceeded every year. It's not Game Over yet, and there's some chance that current conflicts will further accelerate the transition.
If cement industry was a country it would rank 7th for emissions (Economist some yrs ago). EU's CBAM should help w some of the diversion to China and others will need to follow. US insanity will (must) be unsustained.
@samueljohnson @iwein @emily_s @gardengeek @schratze Now if only we could have a solution to cement/concrete's CO2 it'd be great.
edit: Apparently injecting CO2 into concrete as it sets mineralizes it on the spot which is interesting to know, I suppose. -
@samueljohnson @iwein @emily_s @gardengeek @schratze Now if only we could have a solution to cement/concrete's CO2 it'd be great.
edit: Apparently injecting CO2 into concrete as it sets mineralizes it on the spot which is interesting to know, I suppose.@lispi314 @emily_s @gardengeek @samueljohnson @schratze short term we should just use less of it, long term carbon itself provides materials far superior to concrete and steel.
If we'd invest all the budgets going into war right now into research instead, it wouldn't take more than a few decades before we can produce something like graphene at scale.
Not super realistic under capitalism and fascism, but certainly possible from a more scientific perspective.
Oh well
-
@lispi314 @emily_s @gardengeek @samueljohnson @schratze short term we should just use less of it, long term carbon itself provides materials far superior to concrete and steel.
If we'd invest all the budgets going into war right now into research instead, it wouldn't take more than a few decades before we can produce something like graphene at scale.
Not super realistic under capitalism and fascism, but certainly possible from a more scientific perspective.
Oh well
@iwein@mas.to @emily_s@mastodon.me.uk @gardengeek@mstdn.social @samueljohnson@mstdn.social @schratze@todon.nl
short term we should just use less of it
Is that viable? I legitimately don’t know how modern buildings (that aren’t ridiculous skyscrapers justified primarily by absurd car-centric land-use regulations and ego) are built.
For instance, why is brick less common now? Is it worse?
For steel the initial refinement is magnitudes worse than any future recycling/reuse though. So that might be something to incentivize somehow.
Not super realistic under capitalism and fascism, but certainly possible from a more scientific perspective.
I could see adversary states funding research in an attempt to destabilize some country’s industries that happen to be focused on production of one thing or another.
-
@iwein@mas.to @emily_s@mastodon.me.uk @gardengeek@mstdn.social @samueljohnson@mstdn.social @schratze@todon.nl
short term we should just use less of it
Is that viable? I legitimately don’t know how modern buildings (that aren’t ridiculous skyscrapers justified primarily by absurd car-centric land-use regulations and ego) are built.
For instance, why is brick less common now? Is it worse?
For steel the initial refinement is magnitudes worse than any future recycling/reuse though. So that might be something to incentivize somehow.
Not super realistic under capitalism and fascism, but certainly possible from a more scientific perspective.
I could see adversary states funding research in an attempt to destabilize some country’s industries that happen to be focused on production of one thing or another.
@lispi314 small homes are best built from organic materials. That's already being done and works well.
-
@lispi314 small homes are best built from organic materials. That's already being done and works well.
@iwein That's a bit vague though. The environmental impact of SFH is pretty awful regardless of the materials as a consequence of the sprawl & its effects on infrastructural requirements.
At the same time, it's not like prefab-style apartments aren't feasible with wood and unlike in the past we have these fancy sprinkler things now. -
The problem with renewable energies is that they're just not reliable enough.
Where is your wind and solar power supposed to come from now that the strait of Hormuz is blocked?
@schratze Thanks, I laughed hard.
-
@iwein@mas.to @emily_s@mastodon.me.uk @gardengeek@mstdn.social @samueljohnson@mstdn.social @schratze@todon.nl
short term we should just use less of it
Is that viable? I legitimately don’t know how modern buildings (that aren’t ridiculous skyscrapers justified primarily by absurd car-centric land-use regulations and ego) are built.
For instance, why is brick less common now? Is it worse?
For steel the initial refinement is magnitudes worse than any future recycling/reuse though. So that might be something to incentivize somehow.
Not super realistic under capitalism and fascism, but certainly possible from a more scientific perspective.
I could see adversary states funding research in an attempt to destabilize some country’s industries that happen to be focused on production of one thing or another.
@lispi314 @emily_s @iwein@mas.to @gardengeek @samueljohnson@mstdn.social @schratze
most steel is recycled these days. not a lot of new steel has been made in the past 80 years.
