lol aren't solar panels like 99% silicon, which is literally the most abundant crust mineral? Its rocks, its literally rocks. Rocks are what silicon makes up. Will we ever run out of roc
ks?
And so-called "Rare Earth Elements" aren't exactly rare... They just aren't specially concentrated anywhere. You could probably take a Hoe through your Backyard and wind up with a few mg of rare earth elements.
This is such a dumb take, all rocks are not the same. They are not equally effective for silicon extraction. The extraction process itself takes a lot of energy and solar panels are absolutely not 99% silicon, I don't know which crack case you got that idea from. Not to mention that there is an environmental cost of strip mining and scraping the earth for rare minerals.
The real killer though the batteries to store this energy (since we aren’t generating a steady stream of it) which require cobalt, lithium, and manganese. Wind turbines are even worse.
There's alternatives. For example, there's always thermal solar plants and even if the tech isn't all the way here yet, its probably because hardly any research has gone into it since its viewed as less efficient.
And lots of indigenous communities would jump for the chance to open a valuable rare mineral mine that would generate a ton of wealth for their community. A lot of posts here keep bringing up indigenous communities in what I feel is a really disingenuous and tokenizing way, as if they all hm together in common other that having been historically fucked with by colonizers at practically ever opportunity given. Going forward I'd hope that wouldn't continue, its not like a mine automatically has to be built by some outsider who plan on screwing over the community living for their the profit of their investors.
The real killer though the batteries to store this energy (since we aren’t generating a steady stream of it) which require cobalt, lithium, and manganese.
but you really can’t say that scaling up renewable energy is less environmentally impacting than finding a place to store spent waste when you have to destroy entire habitats to fuel the material needs of solar panels.
Why? Why can't you say this?
Nothing you've said up to this point indicates any expertise here, just parroting pop-science propaganda from the pro-nuclear crowd.
Nuclear waste, waste that does not degrade on a human timescale, waste that will seep into the waterways and poison both people (the poorest first) and the environment is arguably on-par for damaging our ecosystem as oil has been. It's not just funky rocks, it's poisonous material we don't currently, and have no prospects for a feasible way to safely contain.
In the same way we kicked the threat of CO2 and plastics down the line for a future generation to solve, banking on nuclear with no possible solution is a dangerous choice.
It's scientifically impossible for nuclear waste to be stored on anywhere other than indigenous land. Also there is no possible case in which indigenous land would be exploited to build solar and wind farms.
Between the four main renewable energy sources of solar, wind, geothermal, and hydro, you have way more power available than nuclear. Especially from solar.
Nuclear power is by far the least extractive power source due to its efficiency. Literally every kind of power requires mining or drilling, and nuclear requires the least of it. Are we going to just pretend that the coup in Bolivia didn't happen and that indigenous lands aren't under threat from increasing demand for renewables?
I, too, enjoy disregarding indigenous people's repeated environmental demands and ignoring long term problems
edit: "long term problems? what about global warming, idiot?" you can scale up solar and wind faster, cheaper, and more safely than nuclear
deleted by creator
lol aren't solar panels like 99% silicon, which is literally the most abundant crust mineral? Its rocks, its literally rocks. Rocks are what silicon makes up. Will we ever run out of roc ks?
And so-called "Rare Earth Elements" aren't exactly rare... They just aren't specially concentrated anywhere. You could probably take a Hoe through your Backyard and wind up with a few mg of rare earth elements.
This is such a dumb take, all rocks are not the same. They are not equally effective for silicon extraction. The extraction process itself takes a lot of energy and solar panels are absolutely not 99% silicon, I don't know which crack case you got that idea from. Not to mention that there is an environmental cost of strip mining and scraping the earth for rare minerals.
deleted by creator
There's alternatives. For example, there's always thermal solar plants and even if the tech isn't all the way here yet, its probably because hardly any research has gone into it since its viewed as less efficient.
And lots of indigenous communities would jump for the chance to open a valuable rare mineral mine that would generate a ton of wealth for their community. A lot of posts here keep bringing up indigenous communities in what I feel is a really disingenuous and tokenizing way, as if they all hm together in common other that having been historically fucked with by colonizers at practically ever opportunity given. Going forward I'd hope that wouldn't continue, its not like a mine automatically has to be built by some outsider who plan on screwing over the community living for their the profit of their investors.
deleted by creator
You can replace batteries with hydrogen.
deleted by creator
You don't have that problem if you store the energy that's produced at peak moments in hydrogen.
deleted by creator
That just means you need to use more of them. At this point, I only care about reducing emissions (and not using to much other recources).
If we'd start using that technology on a large scale, it would evolve to higher efficiency very fast btw.
deleted by creator
Holy shit what a statement in bad faith
deleted by creator
Why? Why can't you say this?
Nothing you've said up to this point indicates any expertise here, just parroting pop-science propaganda from the pro-nuclear crowd.
Nuclear waste, waste that does not degrade on a human timescale, waste that will seep into the waterways and poison both people (the poorest first) and the environment is arguably on-par for damaging our ecosystem as oil has been. It's not just funky rocks, it's poisonous material we don't currently, and have no prospects for a feasible way to safely contain.
In the same way we kicked the threat of CO2 and plastics down the line for a future generation to solve, banking on nuclear with no possible solution is a dangerous choice.
deleted by creator
nuclear means disregarding indigenous people and the more you do the more nuclear it is
Historically yes
It's scientifically impossible for nuclear waste to be stored on anywhere other than indigenous land. Also there is no possible case in which indigenous land would be exploited to build solar and wind farms.
Because all land is indigenous land o7
Alternatively: Send it all to England
Yeah, i'm sure they prefer dumping oil in their lakes and destroying their forests.
You can scale up solar and wind faster, cheaper, and more safely than nuclear as a replacement to fossil fuels
Yes, i'd absolutely love that since I live in a place that would produce tons of energy with the wind.
But nuclear produces way more.
Sorry, but i'm a centrist in this issue.
Between the four main renewable energy sources of solar, wind, geothermal, and hydro, you have way more power available than nuclear. Especially from solar.
Nuclear power is by far the least extractive power source due to its efficiency. Literally every kind of power requires mining or drilling, and nuclear requires the least of it. Are we going to just pretend that the coup in Bolivia didn't happen and that indigenous lands aren't under threat from increasing demand for renewables?