Those who keep complaining that wind turbines do not work when the winds are not blowing, just realized that oil does not work when the Hormuz Strait is not open.
-
Those who keep complaining that wind turbines do not work when the winds are not blowing, just realized that oil does not work when the Hormuz Strait is not open.
@randahl The real problem is that wind turbines are not a substitute for fossil energy.
-
Those who keep complaining that wind turbines do not work when the winds are not blowing, just realized that oil does not work when the Hormuz Strait is not open.
@randahl this should serve as major awakening
-
Those who keep complaining that wind turbines do not work when the winds are not blowing, just realized that oil does not work when the Hormuz Strait is not open.
Spot on!
-
Oil and natural gas provide feed stocks for much more than just diesel and petrol.
sour crude extracted in the region is a primary source of sulfur. sulfur is a feed stock for sulfuric acid. Sulfuric acid is a chemical that’s used to extract and refine copper, nickel, cobalt, and lithium. Oil is an input to a lot of products.
Natural gas and sulfur are also feed stocks for fertilizer.
The global supply chain is the risk
@GhostOnTheHalfShell @chris @randahl Exactly why it is so stupid to burn oil.
-
That's just crazy. Why, you would need some sort of super fusion reactor safely placed about 90 million miles away for that.
Oh.
@pseudonym @tootbrute @randahl No, no, that wouldn't work. You'd have to do wireless power transmission. You'd only get a tiny, tiny fraction of the produced power. Completely impractical.
-
@GhostOnTheHalfShell @chris @randahl Exactly why it is so stupid to burn oil.
Well, yes, no. It is stupid to burn a resource like this, but the stupidity comes from building an economy in this case of global supply chain that exists by eating the planet. It’s built on destroying some other part of the world for the benefit of a tiny few people.
The other way to look at it is that it is a particular choice of economic pathway which temporarily can benefit people, but it is designed to consume the planet and people
-
@randahl To be fair, wind turbines doesn't work when the winds are blowing too hard either.
They need "goldilocks-winds"
@martenbjorklund @randahl
I assume they're engineered to work within the middle hump of the distribution of windspeeds? You could probably make one that worked in a hurricane, and made a tremendous amount of power, but the economics don't favour one that would be doing nothing 11 months in the year. -
@randahl The real problem is that wind turbines are not a substitute for fossil energy.
-
@pseudonym @tootbrute @randahl No, no, that wouldn't work. You'd have to do wireless power transmission. You'd only get a tiny, tiny fraction of the produced power. Completely impractical.
@sharif @pseudonym @tootbrute @randahl
What if … we gave eleventy bazillion dollars to Elon, to launch 42 million X-link satellites to completely enclose the reactor and capture all the radiated energy ?
-
Those who keep complaining that wind turbines do not work when the winds are not blowing, just realized that oil does not work when the Hormuz Strait is not open.
Point.
-
@sharif @pseudonym @tootbrute @randahl
What if … we gave eleventy bazillion dollars to Elon, to launch 42 million X-link satellites to completely enclose the reactor and capture all the radiated energy ?
@isol @pseudonym @tootbrute @randahl Sounds like a roll of the dice, unless they're AI-controlled.
-
@randahl To be fair, wind turbines doesn't work when the winds are blowing too hard either.
They need "goldilocks-winds"
@martenbjorklund
To be extra fair, current turbines have cut-off speeds right in the middle of Beaufort 10 (and turbines for hurricane-areas can go higher).
So between that an 3-4m/s as cut-in speed for large turbines, Goldilocks doesn't seem too picky here
-
J jwcph@helvede.net shared this topic
