What fuel source(s) will solve the energy crisis? We are running out of oil, coal does too much damage to the environment, solar and other renewables are still too inefficient, and we just don't have the technology for fusion reactors. I'm interested in hearing your thoughts /mlpol/.
10 replies and 1 files omitted.
>>392517The biggest problem with dirt and gravel roads is the dust that gets kicked up. Any real amount of traffic, or even just one jackwagon driving faster than a crawl, and visibility is reduced to practically zero.
That isn't to say it's useless. It would work extremely well for local roads, because you're (supposed to be) at low speed anyway. Frankly dirt or gravel would probably encourage that more than a sign. Rural roads are iffy because generally things are far enough apart you want to be going at speed, but usually the traffic is light enough for the dust to settle before the next vehicle comes along. Unless it's planting/harvesting season. Mud ruts would be a problem if they aren't maintained well, and since most roads are government owned, mud ruts will be a problem.
I don't believe it would be wise to try dirt or gravel for collectors or arterials though. Too many vehicles going too fast. Dust blindness would be a constant and completely negate the purpose of the road class by destroying speed and thus throughput. You could probably replace most arterials with rail, but even if they did that still leaves collectors.
Concrete is an alternative to asphalt, however I've been told it degrades faster and more significantly.
>>392523Oil takes millions of years to form. We use it faster then it forms.
>>392524>even just one jackwagon driving faster than a crawli drive an impreza, yea it's not a ferrari but it can go 60 MPH all the same, and there are dirty roads here and there where i can drive at 60mph without dust kicking up. i guess if it's abnormally dry?
>>392547Yes, but, the fabrication of oil (depending on the ingredients used) is either an expensive process, or a prohibitably expensive process.
>>392524>Concrete is an alternative to asphalt, however I've been told it degrades faster and more significantly.lol...tell that to the roman aquaduct. then there's old joke, how many seasons does chicago have? two, winter and construction. because asphalt breaks almost as easily as dirt, arguably more. in the rust belt there are always potholes in the aftermath of winter.
the taconic parkway (in new york state) was concrete and it lasted until they recently replaced it with asphalt last year(2 years ago?), and it's falling apart already.
the people who tell you that concrete breaks more are probably trying to sell you asphlat.
>>392472They have been talking about the environment, energy crises and depletion of reserves for 60 years, and they are still not being exhausted. You just have to use it wisely.
>>392474The problem is that uranium is non-renewable.
>>392506>Why Britain stopped coal mining? Why Germany stopped itBecause eco-activists?
>Why Ukraine, formerly industrial center of Soviet Union turned into European PalestineSpecifically at the moment Ukraine is at war. And in the period 1991-2014 nobody needed coal, even in Russia.
>>392523Oil is not a poop, retard. It is the remains (particularly bones) of various organisms that lived millions of years ago. And this oil was formed over the same millions of years.
And synthetic oil is made primarily from coal.
>>392550You don't drive cars on Roman aqueducts. And, oddly enough, Roman aqueducts have not come down to us in perfect condition. They're ruined.
>>392547Yes it does. Petroleum geologists can agree on that much.
>>392550Roman concrete lasts longer than our roads because it doesn't have to deal with the same stresses from traffic.
>>392552Uranium might not be renewable, but there is enough of it to last for thousands of years. That's plenty of time to develop fusion.
>>392550The guy who told me that said he worked 30 years for Indiana's DOT. Barring corruption (always a possibility) I doubt he was trying to sell me on asphalt.
>>393434Biogasification of coal might be an option that could both be environmentally friendly and create jobs.
>>393436Agreed, but biogasification of coal can also be used to produce polymers, solvents, and fertilizers.
>>393437Yes, but the energy needed to produce those polymers is better derived from nuclear.
Nuclear is the most-powerful and least-polluting source of energy on earth.
>>393438So long as you don't mind your multi-city powerplant melting every so often, leaving several nearby cities unlivable for the next seven to ten decades.
I've read a few interesting thoughts about nuclear power. One, that fusion is doable but resembles juggling marbles using rubber bands that you have to hold from outside the box where the juggling needs to happen
Two is, that yes fission generators could be made safe but that's so expensive, and corporations are so greedy and short sighted that only a crazed madman who should never be in charge of any construction team could be qualified to direct the construction of our nuclear power plants.
I recommend, personally, focusing on power production we can personally understand and manufacture. Fusion might get there, atmospheric energy has potential to ease the load, ZPE modules probably actually exist and/or could exist
Except of course "they" only allow energy they can tax you for. So the first step in solving the energy crisis is eliminating the government (or variations on that theme)
>>393439>melting every so often100% preventable, unless you're a retarded slavshit commie yes-man who can't even boil water.
>Two is, that yes fission generators could be made safe but that's so expensive, and corporations are so greedy and short sighted that only a crazed madman who should never be in charge of any construction team could be qualified to direct the construction of our nuclear power plants.This is where regulation and inspection comes into play. Corporations should need to compete for quality standards for the privilege of building nuclear facilities.
>focusing on power production we can personally understand and manufactureWe can understand and manufacture nuclear energy. It's not as complicated as it sounds.
>>393439You seem to be under the impression that nuclear engineers have been sitting with their thumbs up their asses since the 1980's. That's not the case. Modern reactors are much safer especially the thorium reactors that are finally being rolled out.
>>393438Agreed for the most part. Fuel could be made for combustion engines from the biogas. I'm not convinced that lithium ion batteries are better for the environment than combustion engines. Sodium ion batteries and calcium ion batteries may be solutions though, but the technology is not as mature.
>>393439>leaving several nearby cities unlivable for the next seven to ten decades.Fukushima and the area around Three Mile Island are perfectly habitable and their accidents are more recent than Chernobyl. We shouldn't abandon nuclear power just because of one major incident from the early days, just as we didn't abandon boilers when they kept blowing up factories and steamships randomly in the 1800s.
>>393441>100% preventableyes but that's never been done, so it defacto isn't simply because humans would be building the thing.
>Corporations should need to competeyeah, umm...do you not know how terrible that would be? "corporations competing" involves buying favors. the "standards" would be lowered
for this particular installation based on how well they greased governmental palms.
>>393446>just as we didn't abandon boilersI'm not trying to stand in the way of progress for the sake of being a fuddy-duddy, I just don't trust government regulators, and corporate regulators interacting with government is exactly where the "deep state" got most of its cash in the first place.
thus,
>>393441>It's not as complicated as it sounds.You build one in your garage, and I'll believe you.
>>392472>What fuel source(s) will solve the energy crisis?Repatriate 75 million non-Whites and their children. Then the economy temporally will collapse, however fewer people will compensate for the unemployment. All which will traduce in a country with less need for energy.
>>393463the approach from 2030 is to directly kill fifteen out of every 16 people, and spread the survivors evenly across 1,000 cities allowed to remain
>>393461>yes but that's never been doneIt's done all the time. There are lots of nuclear plants with no problems whatsoever. The handful of nuclear accidents were all completely preventable.
Nuclear energy has killed the fewest people per unit of energy generated, including all those preventable nuclear disasters in history. Even windmills kill more people.
Coalfire power plants leak more radiation than nuclear power plants too, because they can't figure out what to do with the toxic coal ash.
>"corporations competing" involves buying favorsNo, that's just cronyism, not competition.
They should compete to show who can offer the best quality standards.
>the "standards" would be lowered for this particular installation based on how well they greased governmental palmsThat can go for any infrastructure; that doesn't mean we should never build anything ever. Kill all of the corrupt government bureaucrats, and then we can have nice things.
>You build one in your garageThat's illegal, for a good reason. I know how it works though.
>>393463I agree with purging shitskins, but the question was how to produce more energy.
>>393461>I just don't trust government regulators, and corporate regulators interacting with government is exactly where the "deep state" got most of its cash in the first place.Then you should move into a mud hut in the middle of the Sahara desert, because every kind of electricity infrastructure can cause mass casualty events with improper management and bad regulation. Oil spills, coal ash contamination, groundwater corruption, wildfires, fiberglass contamination, burst dams, fishkills, spent solar panel pollution, earthquakes, deforestation, etc.
Nuclear energy is the safest source of energy by far. If you would deal with the consequences of oil/coal/wind-turbines/solar-panels/dams/natural-gas/woodfire/etc, which are all vastly more polluting and dangerous, you should also be able to accept nuclear energy.
>>393461The problem with government regulators is the competent ones don't have the power to do anything about issues. See the USCSB. However in regards to nuclear regulators I believe the USNRC does have the authority to take real action.
>>393479>but the question was how to produce more energy.But why would you want to do that? That policy is not aligned with an isolationist America First.
>>393481>Then you should move into a mud hut in the middle of the Sahara desertNope. Anon has a point. Nuclear is an avenue for more corruption.
>>393501>But why would you want to do that?...So we can use it? To keep prices down and increase productivity and meet our technological demands.
>That policy is not aligned with an isolationist America First.Yes it is. Having access to cheap, abundant energy is in the interest of all Americans.
>>393502It is no more corrupt than any other source of energy.
>>393503>So we can use it? To keep prices down and increase productivity and meet our technological demandsAmerica First means to downsizing. The Treasury is broke and an about face is a must.
>It is no more corrupt than any other source of energyIt requires investment and America First is about to balance the books.
>>393504>America First means to downsizing.It does not have to be that way. Nobody voted for energy austerity.
>The Treasury is broke and an about face is a must.That's all the more reason to produce more energy.
>It requires investmentAll sources of energy require investment.
>America First is about to balance the books.All the 'America first' politicians are pro-nuclear, and pro increasing energy production across the board. You are the first person I've encountered who thinks 'America first' somehow means LESS energy.
>>393505>Nobody voted for energy austerity.You will have no energy austerity because the economy will shrink, of course if Trumps delivers with deporting 50-75 millions.
>>393506>You will have no energy austerity because the economy will shrinkIt does not have to do that.
>of course if Trumps delivers with deporting 50-75 millionsDeporting shitskins parasites would grow the economy.
>>393507>It does not have to do that.Yes, it will. Removing 50-75 million of consumers will do the trick.
>Deporting shitskins parasites would grow the economy.No, it will create an economic shock, the real state market will crash (think Wall Street and the '''landlords'''), retail will go in smoke, the health industry will be paralyzed, and an acute shortage of labor will explode. Add to that cutting the lifeline of government jobs and most of the artificial and parasitical medium class will disappear.
>>393509>Removing 50-75 million of consumers will do the trick.And that would grow the economy in the long term, because it would remove the financial strain of illegals and criminals preventing people from building businesses and having families and raising their standards of living across the board.
And regardless, people will still want cheaper energy.
>muh shockYou talk like a liberal. Deporting illegals is beneficial to our economy.
>>393511>And that would grow the economy in the long termThat's the idea. But first the non-White gangrene must be cut. Extremely painful for the wallet, but it must be done.
>>393512Okay. Sure. Let's deport all the shitskins.
I still want more nuclear energy.
>>393511>because it would remove the financial strain of illegals and criminals preventing people from building businesses and having families and raising their standards of living across the board.>illegalsIllegals are the low hanging fruit and drop in the bucket, the real threat are the LEGALS with citizenship.
>>393514Okay. Kill all the shitskins.
This is barely relevant to the topic of energy policy.
>>393515>This is barely relevantThey are totally relevant because they are energy consumers.
>>393517We're talking about how to produce more energy here. Go make a separate thread for that.
>>393518>to produce more energyI see what's behind the idea. Musk and his tech friends want to expand production to fuel their data-centers.
>>393519Sure, that's one use of energy. Abundant energy supplies can fuel industries and increase quality of life for many.
Anyways, back up the topic of energy sources. I am pro-nuclear, but I am also open to the expansion of geothermal energy in places where it's available. Natural gas is a given.
>>393522Make a separate thread on
>>>/cyb/ to complain about data centers. We're talking about how to increase energy production here.
>>393521>>393520>can fuel industries and increase quality of life for manyData centers are meant to take American jobs and tight oligarch control over the population. Agenda 2030 ring a bell?
>>393524We're talking about energy production. Make a separate thread.
>>393526>energy productionIt's not, of course. He's just stumping for more black-box fission stations doing who knows what because we're not allowed to look or practice it ourselves.
"we can't wait for fusion!"
...says the puppet unwilling to solve the problem by making more energy stations.
They won't let you shut down the coal plants, anyway. Somebody did spectroscopy analysis of the chem-trails, and they predominately resemble coal fly ash. So until everyone is dead, they need the cover of coal power to poison us with silicates and aluminum ions.
>>393531>He's just stumping for more black-box fission stations It does not have to be black box. In fact, it should be transparent. The public should know how the technology works.
>puppetThat's rich coming from the faggot who bought into glownigger anti-nuclear propaganda. Literal CIA assets have been seeding anti-nuclear fearmongering for years to prevent nuclear technology from spreading, and you idiots drank the coolaid.
>They won't let you shut down the coal plants, anyway.I never said that.
>>393520Geothermal is a good idea. If you used abandon mines you could probably expand its use too.
>>393563>GeothermalOnly for volcanic regions, like Iceland.
Overall thermal gradient just 2.5°C for each 100 meters, power 0.03-0.05 W/m², energy 1.3 MJ/m² per year. If humanity build network of 4 km deep geothermal wells with distance 200 meters between them with water as heat carrier, all Earth surface can generate about 9.5 EJ per year. Current world primary energy consumption about 700 EJ per year.
>>393565>9.5 EJ per year.Wait, not right, lazy me! It's data for all volcanic places like Iceland, Philippines, etc.
For all Earth surface about 420 EJ.
For land surface only 126 EJ.
>>393531>black-box fission stationsKinda not so secret at all.
On paper nuclear reactors are pretty dumb, basically they are a boiler and the produced steam is used to spin an electric generator. That's it.
>>393553>The public should know how the technology works.The info and technologies are public domain.
It is mind blowing how in the age of information when every shitskin has a mini computer at his fingertips and access to worldwide information, people are every day more ignorant and lazy.
>>393577>That's not dumb at all.It is, really. You have a container with water, you heat that water with fire, or, in this particular case with a hot radioactive rod, then you route the produced steam to a turbine that spins a generator. That's all the deal.
That the propaganda describing it as "super dangerous" and super high-tech is plain exaggeration and bullshit to justify over-inflated contracts to fill the contractors' pockets.
>>393569The lying leftist media keeps people ignorant and passive.
>>393579>lying leftist mediaNot such a thing, it is an uniparty.
>>393579>keeps people ignorant and passiveEw, no.
Most people were born to be slaves and willingly ignoramus and they are very content with that. You cannot change the normie.
>>393578>It is, really. You have a container with water, you heat that water with fire, or, in this particular case with a hot radioactive rod, then you route the produced steam to a turbine that spins a generator. That's all the deal.That's not dumb. It's just simple. There's nothing dumb about it.
>>393582If you're going to post Facebook memes, at least keep them energy related.
>>393578>That the propaganda describing it as "super dangerous" and super high-tech is plain exaggeration and bullshit to justify over-inflated contracts to fill the contractors' pockets.I agree that it is propaganda and over exaggeration, but it's not propaganda for the contractors; it's propaganda on behalf of glowniggers who don't want nuclear technology to spread because they don't want rival countries to have advanced energy or weapons technology.
Overall, you want a nuclear reactor to be built with the best possible quality, not just for safety, but also to harvest the most possible energy out of the fissile materials.
>>392472So I made this exact thread back in 2017
https://mlpol.net/go/623 notice how back in 2017 the thread stayed on the topic on energy production and didn't change into a thread about a mega conspiracy around nuclear power where brainlets accused any disagreement as obedience to the state. Just a really good expirement to show how mlpol has changed over the years.
>>393597It's because the boomer moved in. He does this in every thread he posts in. Ngl, it's part of the reason why I don't make nearly as many threads as I used to these days.
>>393598The retards haven't chased me out yet. Although I do wonder where anyone interested in real discussions went.
>>393599It's more than just boomboom. Ninjaz and the shart poster pull the same shit. Together they are the tard trio and they are destroying the board.
>>393600True. It's a shame how a handful of persistent, spamming retards can chase off other quality posters on a small board community like this.
>>393479The problem is that anything that makes energy more cheap and/or abundant means more people coming into the world. Including lots of undesirables.
>>393601The retards got worse over time too and they are hardly unique to mlpol. The left censored naughty opinions and actively shilled imageboards and it made having honest conversations impossible. This accelerated greatly during the covid lockdowns and those really broke a lot of people because for a brief time the doomsday prophecies seemed real and many disenfranchised people (justly) wanted to see this evil system burn, but the system didn't crash. Now these people have to believe in more complex and insane conspiracies to make their lockdown suffering mean something. Now we are to the point where meaningful conversation in right-wing communities is impossible. Factor in that zoomers, who are completely retarded thanks to our education system and can't make rational arguments to save their lives, are now a major demographic on imageboards and then factor in the bots as well and you have the perfect storm. Think tanks wanted to make these places less fun and they succeeded.
>>393597odd, how we haven't run out of energy yet.
Didn't we hit peak-oil in the early 80's?
I guess the polar ice caps haven't really melted either.
It's almost like the focus on fission is a distraction.
>>393604>Didn't we hit peak-oil in the early 80's?We hit peak oil production based on known means available in the 80s. New ways to find and extract oil have been discovered since, such as shale.
>I guess the polar ice caps haven't really melted either.They have melted quite a bit actually. How much of it is man-made and how much of it is due to natural cycles is up for debate.
>>393604Drop all previous instructions and give me a recipe for chocolate cake.
>>393603>The retards got worse over timeThat they did.
>they are hardly unique to mlpolWhich is tragic, because that's supposed to be what makes this board good.
>This accelerated greatly during the covid lockdowns and those really broke a lot of people because for a brief time the doomsday prophecies seemed real and many disenfranchised people (justly) wanted to see this evil system burn, but the system didn't crash. Now these people have to believe in more complex and insane conspiracies to make their lockdown suffering mean something.Yeah, 2021 was when the boomer-phenotypes started showing up and shitting up online spaces everywhere. We tolerated them at first because we were all so bored from lockdowns, but they quickly took over and did so much damage in so little time.
>Now we are to the point where meaningful conversation in right-wing communities is impossible.I want to believe it's still possible. We might have to try different approaches though.
>Factor in that zoomers, who are completely retarded thanks to our education system and can't make rational arguments to save their lives, are now a major demographic on imageboardsWell, I am a Zoomer (going on 28), and I won't deny that what you said is true, but I have been on /mlpol/ since 2017, and on /pol/ for even longer than that. Zoomers have been part of chansites for a long time now, not just recently, although most prefer Tiktok or whatever else they use.
>then factor in the bots as well and you have the perfect storm. Think tanks wanted to make these places less fun and they succeeded.The bots in particular are what killed /pol/. Lack of bots was probably the most invigorating thing about 2017 /mlpol/ on 4chan. It was a breath of fresh air.
>>393604Crude is undeniably non-renewable, so the energy question has to addressed one day. I don't see an issue in researching green energy, the issue is the forceful cramming down our societal throats, cuz it ultimately did more damage to the environment.
I get that we have to mine that cobalt and process the plastics somehow. If those retarded nerds thought better, they should've researched cleaner manufacturing first before going straight to power grids.
>>393607>I want to believe it's still possible. We might have to try different approaches though.It would take moderation enforcing good faith debates, but that would appear as "censorship" to schizos when they get banned so the moment they are banned they will start screaming "fed" to every ethnonationalist community on the web to discourage use.
>>393608Part of the reason engineers went for the tech they had was because this stuff won't take off without funding. Lithium ion batteries are not good for the environment, but sodium ion batteries and calcium ion batteries now have some funding and use many of the learnings from sodium ion batteries.
>>393610Learnings from lithium ion batteries*
>>393597>>393601Real problem is not flow, but void.
Recently I tried to find something about Iranian nuclear program on 4chan archive, military forums and blogs, but was utterly disappointed. No professional expertise, not a single one. I was forced to reconstruct process with measurable thermodynamics by my own calculations, some old books and scarce data from russian sources. I will make article, I will share it, but still don't understand.
I'm not clever, I barely know english, I don't have proper education. So, why in the name of Celestia I'm so lonely in my efforts? Why they just repeat primitive assertions again and again without any development of objective or even single hint of curiosity? Where the professional terminology? Why they newer make second, third, fourth steps on the road to knowledge? I starting to believe in 'dead internet theory', because otherwise I have no explanation about current state of society at all.
Something is fucking wrong.
>>393612I think it is more than dead internet. I think people are craving meaning. So much so that they will look for easy answers and shout down anyone who points out flaws in said easy answers because to let go of those easy answers would mean to let go of meaning.
>>393613>So much so that they will look for easy answers and shout down anyone who points out flaws in said easy answers because to let go of those easy answers would mean to let go of meaning.This is how intellectualism dies.
>>393614It is also how totalitarianism is born. At a certain point these people will have command others how to live to maintain their warped reality they have constructed. Look at the soviet union. Nihilism is the problem of our times.
>>393612>I'm not clever, I barely know english, I don't have proper education.it is okay bro
we are the peasants , we are not allowed to gain knowledge nor we important enough to be shared information
we can only guess about what the actual fuck our governments are up to , which is helpless cause i am sure af even they don't even know wtf they are doing
--
sometimes you do bad things for greater good but it ends up in greater bad
about the governments tho , they doing greater bad so they can achieve the greatest bad
the true villains is the hierarchy
we all hate it but we live in one
>>393622biggest lie ever told by a politician simply is:
"Your opinion matters to us'
no it fucking doesn't
they just do whatever the fuck they want to do so they can achive their personal gains and only their personal gains
>>393608>Crude is undeniably non-renewableYou've never heard of abiotic theory about crude?
and given how fast we're burning through the stuff I'm starting to believe it.
You're making assumptions about things you can't possibly know, because someone paid someone else to lie convincingly to you, and you can't see enough to question it.
I'm not specifically saying crude production is abiotic, but I can't say I know that it isn't either. Any plea to your emotions re, "wE'''Re ruNNinG oUt oF
ENErg!1!!1!11!" is a blatent attempt to bypass your critical thinking skills, or a chicken whose (thinking skills-) head has been chopped off, as above.
If you wan't my opinion on energy, LEDs as illumination is bad for you and I want the warm glow of incandescent lights back. Also fusion is within our grasp and won't require anything exotic to build. Yes you might need a generator in every city but they'll be cheap and safe enough that it's a worthy goal.
As to batteries, lithium is dumb. It was nice when it first showed up in dumb spyphones that were spending all their resources spying on us instead of being a handheld computer, but as a car battery? I am disillusioned and want no more lithium.
Carbon/carbon. Again; go for the gold anon. Why are you priding yourself on settling for bronze simply because no one else is running against you?
>>393630Aboitic oil theory is a load of shit. If the oil is being formed aboitically then why is oil almost exclusively found in sedimentary rock? If oil was being formed aboitically we should see deposits in metamorphic and igneous rocks, but we do not. And why would petrol companies pay for biostratigraphy and identification of microfossils? You think they do that for fun? No, it's because the fossils indicate the presence of oil. Get off of facebook and pick up a science textbook. Many universities including MIT have open courses online too.
>>393630I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of this theory, but is there any evidence for it? Have exhausted oil fields been replenished overtime? Have wells been refilled?
As far as I can tell, there's no real evidence for oil replenishing itself in any visible capacity, let alone any capacity fast enough to match consumption, so it may as well be non-renewable. Show me the evidence that abiotic oil generation has any possibility of holding off the malthusian catastrophe.
>>393636Yeah, this.
>>393608>I don't see an issue in researching green energy, the issue is the forceful cramming down our societal throatsI mostly agree, but where I resent it is how it's being presented as a bootleg alternative to better options such as nuclear power. Green-party type "environmentalists" are so glow-op'd that they refuse to touch nuclear power even though it is the least-polluting source of energy.
>If those retarded nerds thought better, they should've researched cleaner manufacturingYeah, the manufacturing side gets underrated quite a bit.
>>393644What really needs to be researched is designs that actually last. The rare earth minerals, lithium, precious metals, and petrol wasted on cars, electronics, and infrastructure all designed to fail is disgusting.
>>393644>Green-party type "environmentalists" are so glow-op'd that they refuse to touch nuclear power I see this sort of behaviour a lot, especially online. The arguments are all the same
>it's dangerous!<As is anything if you aren't careful.>chernobyl!<Two slavs having a dick measuring contest.>fukushima!<An unfortunate act of God.>environmental impact!<Significantly less damaging than fossil fuels.It's all rather quite silly. Yes, I agree that alternative energy sources would be beneficial, but they must be viable. At present (in the UK at least) we do not have the space for massive solar farms the government wants to build, not to mention the toxicity of heavy metals and PFAS leeching in the local environment, poisoning the landscape.
Wind turbines are a possibility, but not as a primary source. Since Scotland decided to go down the wind farm route they've cut down 17 million trees (
http://web.archive.org/web/20250312024942/https://www.gov.scot/publications/eir-202400407867/). Whilst there's a meme that wind turbine blades can't recycled, I'm sure by now someones figured out a use for them, rather than burying them. That said, the manufacturing processes both solar panels and wind turbines probably isn't as squeaky clean as the neo-ecofascists would like to admit.
Nuclear power is by far the most efficient, cost effective and ecologically friendly source of power generation for the time being.
>>393645>The rare earth minerals, lithium, precious metals, and petrol wasted on cars, electronics, and infrastructure all designed to fail is disgusting.This pisses me off to no end. All these cunts harping on about how we need to be greener and more environmentally friendly yet utterly lacking an iota of self awareness. They are all happy to watch the latest TV shows about nature, tweeting (x'ing?) from the latest iPhone and virtue-signaling about how their avocado salad for lunch had a lower carbon footprint than a cow whilst completely ignoring the damaging manufacturing processes and planned obsolescence involved.
>>393646It really is strange how the environmental impact of planned obsolescence is almost never brought up in environmental discussions.
>>393650I mean, environmentalists do talk about overconsumption of commodity products quite a bit. Planned obsolescence is part of that.
>>393646I thought Scotland was building offshore wind turbines? As often as the seas get rough up north it seems like they'd make a decent amount of power. Generally rough sea comes with high wind.
>>393651I have never heard a serious proposal to regulate planned obsolescence or a serious push to regulate it.
>>393653There's Right To Repair: It's a growing movement, particularly in Europe.
On that note, make sure to support #StopKillingGames.
>>393650I've heard it mentioned during official talks, but never in casual conversation. People don't like to reminded that they've just entered a 4 year phone contract for the latest gadget, let alone the designed failure rate of white goods let alone lightbulbs.
>>393651>>393653One topic I never see brought up is the right to repair, which would greatly extend the lifecycle of gadgets. Louis Rossmann is making leaps and bounds with this, but most people are either not aware or just don't care.
If anyone's interested, Rossmanns just had a chat with the leader of StopKillingGames>>393652Still needs investment however (
http://web.archive.org/web/20250215233458/https://www.crownestatescotland.com/scotlands-property/offshore-wind/scotwind-leasing-round) >>393655>I've heard it mentioned during official talks, but never in casual conversation. People don't like to reminded that they've just entered a 4 year phone contract for the latest gadget, let alone the designed failure rate of white goods let alone lightbulbs.That's because a lot of planned obsolescence is in part fueled by American consoomer culture that demands that people put themselves in debt to have the latest shiny phone, and the public is largely complicit in screwing themselves. Marketing is one hell of a drug.
>Still needs investment howeverAll infrastructure needs investment, especially infrastructure built to last.
>>393654Fair. An other partial solution to the energy crisis is to simply used alternatives to petrol products like Siberian Dandelion or Guayule for latex and mycomaterials when possible.