Why were there so many solar farms if it was always cloudy?

Why were there so many solar farms if it was always cloudy?

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    It's always cloudy, so there's a lot of solar farms.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      fpbp

  2. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Solar farms like that actually kill hundreds of birds per year. But the Hollywood morons are pushing the green energy myth. We will live in a wonderful world of electric cars charged by solar and wind.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      This movie is about a dystopian future you fantastically moronic motherfricker.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        every sci fi movie is really about earth today , dummy.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >a few dead birds
      >constant droughts, coastal flooding and heat waves
      i think i prefer the first one

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >constant droughts, coastal flooding and heat waves
        Just 10 more years.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >10 more years a year ago
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Western_North_America_heat_wave

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >the sunbelt is hot
            Holy shit SHUT EVERYTHING DOWN RIGHT NOW

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >weather is not climate
            >except when it is

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >not the birds!!
      peoples cats kill way more birds, we should outlaw cats
      bonus effect is it would make lonely women actually find a man

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        That thing about billions of birds a year is a israeli myth because israelites hate cats. israelites relate to mice. They often portray themselves as such.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          Incorrect, which is why songbirds thrive where coyotes thrive, because coyotes keep the feral cat population low, so songbirds aren't all killed.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Bird aren't real anyways

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Based

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      more animals die for environmental damage caused by mining coal, and burning it than a few dumbshits getting hit by light and spinning blades

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Oh no! Not coal. It's not like coal is used to pump out all these shitty solar panels that dont last 20 years, BY CHINA. You green fricking morons should all be shot in the head, so we can see the bullet pass clean through those empty skulls.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Not even the real problem with solar panels. The real problem is they waste tons of water and can't be fricking recycled once they're used up. Pretty funny.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Where do you guys get this propaganda? Tucker Carlson?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        OP pic are not solar panels, they're mirrors, it's called concentrated solar power or somthing like that

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        also the energy input needed to manufacture them which comes mostly from oil.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >solar energy is bad, because it needs current energy infrastructure (which happens to sometimes be gas/oil) to be built
          Are you moronic?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            You gonna use electric construction equipment to dig out those heavy metals for batteries?

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              >You gonna use electric construction equipment to dig out those heavy metals for batteries?
              You gonna use oil to use that celphone battery?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Yes actually. That's kind of how power works

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                You use literal crude oil in your house to power your battery?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                No, I pay the people who use it to boil steam in order to turn a turbine.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Then what the frick does your argument have to do with the solar energy industry? Being contrarian just for the sake of being contrarian is a sign of bad character.

                You realize they used horses to build the first railways across the world right?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Horses are more environmentally friendly than trains so your point there is kind of a false equivalence

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                It absolutely isnt. Shows how little you understand the problem. Look up "horse manure crisis of London".

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                You do realize that a city is literally environmentally destructive in the first place

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                imagine linking an article literally in the category of journalistic hoaxes

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Just because you outsource your oil consumption to other people doesn't magically make it go away midwit

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                So whats your point? That the status quo negates any argument to move towards a greener energy network/system? Or is anyone who uses electricity everyday, despite calling for a greener lifestyle a hypocrite?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                No, the point is that green energy is not efficient enough to pay for itself environmentally

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Except that it is because however dirty you think solar, wind, hydroelectric, and nuclear are, its nothing compared to coal, gas, and oil.
                Even if it somehow wasn't clean energy sources would win simply by virtue of economics. Even heavily subsidized fossil fuels simply can't compete with clean energy even when barriers are put in their way because they just cost less per MWh.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >solar, wind, hydroelectric, and nuclear
                Don't lump Nuclear in with the meme energy you well-poisoning fricktard.
                We could power the West for fricking pennies with nuclear but we're not allowed to because the government is too busy lining its pockets with green energy deals enabled by useful idiots like yourself who actually think solar or wind have any chance of having any positive impact.

                Nuclear is the future or the fricking lights go out. End of story.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Maybe in 20 years, we can power shit with solar/wind once people get their heads out of their asses, especailly with solar. In california it takes about a gorillion dollars and a year just to get some panels on your house

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >Maybe in 20 years
                Great but the lights are going off in the next 10 if we don't switch to Nuclear. The writing is on the wall and everyone towing the solar/wind line is just making money for other people in the short term and shooting themselves repeatedly in the foot in the long term.

                Japan is reactivating its Nuclear Reactor fleet and China is building new ones. Parts of Europe are finally seeing the light and starting to get on board too because while they can still scare people into handing over their money to the gov they are running out of time before we need an actual fricking power source, after which they will inevitably find a way to keep squeezing tax money out of the idiots who actually believe the sandwhichboard-wearing global warming doomsayers despite them being wrong about every single fricking prediction they've ever made over the past 50 years.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >global warming doomsayers

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous
              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous
              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous
              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous
              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >we're not allowed to
                Speak for yourself, my electricity comes from a clean nuclear power station, and more are going to be built.
                However, I also get a bunch of electricity from wind, and it is a reliable and economic supplier for peak power demand.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                wind isn’t a good supplier for peak demand since it’s unreliable.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Do you have a single fact to back that up?

                >he actually fell for it
                yea they fry hundreds if not thousands of birds a year
                which is a fraction of the birds that would be dying from other means of energy production
                also who gives a shit, in a few generations we'll have birds who are smart enough not to fly into something that's brighter than the sun

                Even if that was true hundreds or thousands of birds a year is a very small number. Billions of birds die every year flying into windows, tall smoke stacks, and more than anything from being attacked by domestic cats.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, since it’s fact that wind turbines do not generate power without wind.
                And it’s also a fact that the wind is not consistent and predictable, and as such not reliable.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >And it’s also a fact that the wind is not consistent and predictable, and as such not reliable.
                Your declaring that doesn't make it true. It may apply for a single wind turbine, but when there are enough of them like in my home state the wind is going to be blowing reliably and the turbines can adjust to produce the energy needed.
                This is like saying that the sun isn't reliable because you don't know if its going to rise tomorrow.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                The sun isn’t reliable, since it’s only generating power at most half of the day.
                Reliable power means on demand generation.

                Not to mention what happened to Texas
                >invest in windmills and only windmills for years
                >neglect other power generating sources
                >once in a decade ice storm
                >wind turbines must be shut down to prevent damage
                >grid collapses due to lack of generating capacity while everyone is turning on the heater
                I’m just glad that my state doesn’t have the luxury of experimenting with unreliable energy sources, so these things never really influence me.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >Not to mention what happened to Texas
                Stop spreading bullshit, the failure in Texas was from improperly weatherized fossil fuel plants.
                The windmills in my state survive far worse conditions without problems every year.

                If Texas brought their grid up to federal standards and interconnected with the rest of the country they'd be able to buy power from better run Northern states.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >it was the thermal plants
                Lol I love this lie, since I can now ask you this:
                Have you ever looked at the generation reports for the day in question. Thermal plants went down to 30% capacity.
                Wind went down to 0%. Roughly 30% of the generating load for the previous weeks was from wind.

                No matter how you paint it, thermal lost efficiency because of lack of maintenance due to funds being strictly reserved to “renewables”.
                Yet thermal STILL didn’t shit the bed as bad as wind did. If the portion of the generation that was due to wind was replaced with thermal, the grid would not have died since 30% is more than 0%.

                You stupid fricks are quite literally destroying your energy infrastructure because of politics. It’s so fricking funny to see.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >Liberal Politics is to blame!
                Except this is Texas where even milquetoast center-right Democrats have no power and the far-right has total control.
                This is happening in Texas simply because renewables provide the cheapest MWh of electricity, and that makes the power companies in the State the most money.
                They've bet that they won't get enough severe weather to disrupt their wholly inadequate preparations enough to cost them more money than weatherizing their power stations.

                Like it or not, my state gets the majority of peak power from wind, and it has no trouble coping with far more severe winter weather than what Texas got.
                If Texas complied with Federal requirements they wouldn't be having these problems.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >the far-right has total control
                lol
                lmao

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Notice how you don’t actually address any of the numerical FACTS I’ve presented. You instantly reduce this argument into left/right American politics.

                You’re a lemming. The Texas grid failed because funds were specifically DENIED from maintaining thermal power plants in favor of wind turbines, and when the obvious consequences for that decision come to bear you relentlessly deny these FACTS.

                30% of the generation for the grid GONE within a few hours. Oh but surely the grid collapsing isn’t due to that 30% disappearing with no viable replacement.

                You stupid political fricks need to stay out of energy.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >Notice how you don’t actually address any of the numerical FACTS I’ve presented.
                Except that your "Facts" aren't facts anon. Even ERCOT has admitted that "least significant factor in the blackout." and their output actually increased slightly during that time.
                There's no liberal politics to blame for the failings of Texas's grid.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Just because you disagree with them because of your partisanship doesn’t make them not facts.
                I also love how you use ERCOT as a source after just criticizing them.

                The FACT that the wind turbines had to be completely taken off the grid significantly influenced the grid failure. You can’t just lose 30% of your production and it not be an issue.
                You are also confused, as the issues with the thermal plants are due to a lack of funding, based on what ERCOT has said.

                I will remind you again: Austin CHOSE to spend their energy grant on nothing but wind. They weren’t the only ones.
                This is what happens when you play politics with utilities.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Why do you keep singling out Austin as if it isn't a government that represents the whole of Texas? Its also heavily gerrymandered to reduce the power of more liberal areas of the state like Austin.
                Texas is not playing politics with utilities, at least not in the way you're suggesting. The far-right government of the state has had lax oversight of electrical companies and that is the source of the problems.

                >You can’t just lose 30% of your production and it not be an issue.
                Except that it wasn't that much.
                >Only 7% of ERCOT’s forecasted winter capacity, or 6 gigawatts, was expected to come from various wind power sources across the state.

                This failure was also caused solely by Texas's lack of oversight and failure to adhere to the basic standards that allow wind power to operate reliably in much colder climates.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Austin is the Capitol of Texas, and their action serves as an example for the political landscape of the state.
                They were not the only ones to restrict the energy budget to only renewables. Regardless, it’s a terrible mistake.
                >except that it wasn’t that much
                >quotes forecasts
                Again anon, we have a website that literally tells us the generation for that time frame.
                I’m quite literally looking RIGHT NOW. Wind energy was 30% of the total generation for the state of Texas in the weeks leading up to the big freeze.
                When the big freeze occurs, it drops to a fat 0%.

                Are you really going to sit here and tell me this clear over-reliance on wind, and then being forced to detach said wind for fear of damaged turbines, has nothing to do with wind power?

                You really are from Iowa LOL.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >Austin were not the only ones to restrict the energy budget to only renewables.
                Never happened. Austin is cut into little pieces to prevent it from having any political say in the state.

                >in the weeks leading up to the big freeze.
                Which is not the time when the state's fossil fuel plants froze up. Wind was only expected to provide 7% then.

                No way around this anon. Texas's grid failed in conditions that the rest of the country would laugh off, and that happened because of poor oversight and preparation.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                The dude is literally just going off of FOX news bullshit and youtube propaganda, not even worth discussing with him.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Incorrect, I’m literally going based off of factual electricity data reported on
                eia.gov

                I invite you to prove me wrong, but you won’t.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                and what state are you from so I can fact check you with this convenient website
                https://www.eia.gov/

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                https://www.eia.gov/electricity/state/iowa/

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >Iowa
                lol explains a lot. California generates more wind power than you do.
                Your state also received power from other sources, just from a look at the eia dashboard.
                Your electricity is also fairly expensive, did you know that?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >California generates more wind power than you do.
                California has much more land area, and a larger population. Why would that be surprising?
                Plus:
                >California - Primary energy source: Natural gas

                >Your state also received power from other sources
                That's the advantage of being connected to a larger grid. Iowa sells energy when it has a surplus, buys energy when its needed.
                As North Korea shows Juche isn't a good policy.

                >Your electricity is also fairly expensive, did you know that?
                Less than $.10 a kWh isn't particularly bad, and a lot of people here have solar panels.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >coping
                Anon, your state is tiny as frick and has THREE wind farms.
                I don’t know how to tell you this, but you don’t need power to grow corn. Just because your state has found a niche for wind power does not mean it can replace thermal power across the nation.

                It’s also hilarious that your energy is just as expensive as mine and you don’t see the problem.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >does not mean it can replace thermal power across the nation.
                No one ever claimed that it could. Nuclear power is the solution.

                >your energy is just as expensive as mine and you don’t see the problem.
                Well my personal power is free now because I've got solar panels.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                solar panels have the same issue as wind: their economic solely because of subsidies and their ecological footprint is worse, although it is exported offshore.

                You’re correct about nuclear however. The way forward is nuclear and NG, with wind and solar(and geothermal where applicable) filling niches along the way.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >their economic solely because of subsidies
                Maybe 40 years ago, the cost of solar panels is falling rapidly and any government subsidies have long since paid for themselves in dividends.
                They're one of the best investments you can make both for personal financial reasons, and for environmental reasons.

                Nuclear plus zero carbon sources is the way forward anon. Liquid fuels and natural gas are on their way out because they cost too much, and they compromise the security of the United States and our allies.
                The faster fossil fuels are phased out the better, if you think the paltry millions spend on renewables are bad, fossil fuels gets trillions.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                You sound like a salesman.
                >zero carbon forces
                You should stop letting ideologically influence energy policy.
                Thermal energy will never be phased out simply because it’s available on demand.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                there’s also an incredible about of subsidies keeping solar panels afloat. I’m not sure how you think it’s even remotely economic without them.
                Practically every state has them.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >liquid fuels and natural gas are on their way
                ROFL, you are have no clue. Unless we develop energy storage medium that makes hydrocarbons completely obsolete.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Give him a break, he’s from Iowa. This technology is fairly new to him.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                And anon, Iowa had a net negative generation Jan-May of 2021.

                Explain to me how your wind supplies your demand, yet your net generation drops into the negatives?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                > Texas brought their grid up to federal standards and interconnected with the rest of the country
                Texas already has a grid up to standard, and they gain absolutely NOTHING by connecting it to the southeastern grid.

                In 2017 Austin received funds for expanding their energy infrastructure and they spent it entirely on wind power. If you want a source for the issue, look no further than Austin.

                Putting all of your eggs in the basket that is reliant on the wind to blow is not going to lead to prosperity.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Here, educate yourself
                https://www.eia.gov/
                Oh wow would you look at their top story
                >California drought could reduce hydroelectric generation to half of normal levels
                “Renewables” just can’t catch a break.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >Do you have a single fact to back that up?
                It's not always windy

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                >Do you have a single fact to back that up?

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                If you're asserting that the energy required for the manufacture, installation, and decommissioning of solar panels or wind turbines is less than that produced over their lifetime, that's not even close to true .

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              Yes, or fuels from plants, or ammonia, or synthetic liquid hydrocarbon fuels produced from carbon dioxide, water, and electricity, depending on which is cheapest.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          The energy input to manufacture virtually anything currently comes from fossil fuels. That's literally the entire issue.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Why dont we just put trash on a disposable cheap rockets and blast them off to space?

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          cause it takes a lot of fricking fuel to send shit away

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >The real problem is they waste tons of water
        Do you have any idea how much water is wasted to extract oil and gas or coal every day?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >can't be fricking recycled once they're used up
        Don't forget wind turbines. Feels good to be helping the environment like this

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          wow, landfill, I hope you never create waste that goes to landfill anon, otherwise you'd look quite a fool

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      God you fricking people are so profoundly moronic

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >a few dead birds
      >constant droughts, coastal flooding and heat waves
      i think i prefer the first one

      more animals die for environmental damage caused by mining coal, and burning it than a few dumbshits getting hit by light and spinning blades

      Not even the real problem with solar panels. The real problem is they waste tons of water and can't be fricking recycled once they're used up. Pretty funny.

      Dumb fricks. The real problem with solar farms is they are ugly, and in order to be even remotely effect you have to already that ugly over a large area. It destroys the topography, and ecology of the area as well but that doesn't matter. They are unsightly. No one wants to look at it. They are trying to destroy everything good outside the city so that an ever expanding concrete sea is the only option. Imagine supporting any form of energy. If you can't sail there, or get there by horseback, you were never meant to go there.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        literally every form of power generation is ugly and area destroying you dumbass chud. except maybe nuclear the plants look cool

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        If you can’t communicate with someone by writing a letter and sending it, you were never meant to post on the internet.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        i bet you never go outside, literally no one cares if they put a billion of these up in the desert.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          who is “they”, and who is going to pay for it?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >who is “they”
            the people who pay him
            >and who is going to pay for it?
            You and me, also him

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      good thing most animals are extinct in blade runner

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      How tf do solar farms kill birds?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        they get extremely fricking hot near/above them.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          they don't deserve to make it tbh

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            enjoy the swarms of insects

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >hundreds of birds per year
      Sounds like a lot until you realize that house cats let outside kill 2.4 billion birds every year, and about 1 billion birds die from flying into windows.
      More birds die from the effects of burning coal and oil than die from solar or wind.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      god damn those bird-murdering libtards

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >he actually fell for it
      yea they fry hundreds if not thousands of birds a year
      which is a fraction of the birds that would be dying from other means of energy production
      also who gives a shit, in a few generations we'll have birds who are smart enough not to fly into something that's brighter than the sun

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        > yea they fry hundreds if not thousands of birds a year which is a fraction of the birds that would be dying from other means of energy production
        citation desperately needed

        Especially since most oil is drilled offshore.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >Especially since most oil is drilled offshore.
          think of the seagulls

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Seagulls feast around oil rigs, though. The fishies eating the crud stuck to the rig attract them.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >believes in birds
      "birds" were a myth created by the CIA in order to trick idiots into believing in evolution and conveniently explain what happened to the dinosaurs.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Meds. Now.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Master bait right here

  3. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    are you stupid?

  4. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Because all other resources are running out and its a last resort.

  5. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    It’s a dystopian future after all. A future where moronic “clean energy” lobbying beats out nuclear so in the end 90% of the earth is covered in solar panels because they’re so fricking useless you need a billion to power a single city.

    In fact it’s what most moronic countries in the world are doing atm, putting green energy everywhere with no thought whatsoever wasting trillions

  6. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    oh yeah because ur an ecological blessing

  7. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    idk, the shot is cool af though

  8. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    same situation as Germany. no wind or sun there and yet they are betting the future of their country on it. lol get fukt

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Germany buys most of its energy from the French (who have nuclear energy)

      [...]

      >muh pest holocaust
      Feral cats have a non zero effect on the ecosystem. And no, one island doesn't prove anything. Dumbest argument in the world

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        interesting

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >there is no wind or sun in Germany

      m8

  9. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    it is pretty dumb considering they could put solar farms in space.

  10. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Snakes on a Plane

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Wasn't that one meme movie with that black guy?

  11. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Climate change believers are essentially the Reveltation doomsday cultists of our time

  12. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I will personally dedicate myself to dastardly attacks on "green energy" until nuclear is fully embraced inshallah

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      based

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      inshallah, brother.

  13. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    blade runner 2049

  14. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >be California
    >dismantle nuclear energy grid
    >now go after conventional fossil fuel power
    >spend trillions on windmills and solar panels that do nothing
    >surging population from open borders and every migrant having 50 kids means further strains on power grid
    >tell people to buy electric cars
    >rolling brownouts like third world country

    Not even pol but this shot drives me crazy

  15. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Any green experts ITT can confirm if the mining companies that rape the landscape for lithium, cobalt, silver etc to build these renewable machines and electric car batteries are in fact solar powered mining rigs??

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      The number one use cobalt in transportation is in the refining of fossil fuels. Anyone who thinks that BEVs are somehow more resource intensive has no idea how much goes into making the fuel that propels gas cars. A battery gets used for 20 years in a car 350k miles before it needs to be retired to stationary storage applications, gas gets used a single time.

      >solar powered mining rigs?
      In a sense since lithium was in the past collected by evaporating it out of brine.
      Now there is a new technique that involves pumping the brine through membranes that extract the lithium using far less water, and increasing yields.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        so what do they charge the battery with during its lifetime

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          The US gets more electricity from clean, safe, nuclear power than it does from coal, and zero carbon sources as a whole outnumber natural gas.
          Even run entirely off of coal, an increasingly unlikely scenario in Western Democracies, an EV that gets more than 3 miles to a kWh will emit less CO2.
          Current generation EVs average around 4 miles per kWh annually, and next-generation EVs will average 5 or more.

          No way around the fact that BEVs are the best option today.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            you forget that you export the environmental costs to China when it comes to constructing these EVs.
            that’s a bit disingenuous, no?

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              Tesla Model 3 is the most American made car anon.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                Lithium isn’t mined in America.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                You're right, it comes from Australia. Dumb c**t.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous

                so our carbon footprint is exported offshore.
                thank you for proving my point.

  16. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    a common misconception is that the solar panels don't get any energy when it's cloudy, of course they do, just not as much.
    solar panels also work with the moonlight and when covered with snow, just much, MUCH less efficiently

  17. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    the get government subsidies

  18. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Simple, factual answer. They tried it to save the world. It DIDNT WORK. IT DOESNT WORK! EVERY GREEN ENERGY IS STUPID and cancerous! They're all just an excuse to keep capitalism afloat by changing a source and creating a demand/market for things we DONT need. Solar Panels are the Betamax of energy. Wind is the 8-track cassettes.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      pretty clever anon, betamax, the vastly superior format, destroyed because the capitalistic forces choosing vhs for pornography and getting the market share first

  19. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Moisture farming.

  20. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Because they're subsidised by evil beuracrats and shilled by midwits

  21. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I hate Russians for destroying nuclear power's reputation.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Chernobyl is in Ukraine

  22. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >dude just make every vehicle electric and all power generation 'green' so the grid can collapse and never recover
    Are these based morons secred Kaczynski bros?

  23. 2 years ago
    Anonymous
  24. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    those are actually GPUs mining bitcoins

  25. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Solar panels are extremely wasteful and can't be efficiently maintained groundside due to all the dust and other contaminants. Why a space faring civilization would place millions upon millions of solar panels on a planet's surface is beyond me, especially when they can just place them on a body with no atmosphere or in orbit and transmit the energy to the buildings below.

  26. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    That's the joke

  27. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >read literally every post in the thread for a cogent, educated argument against solar energy
    >not a single one
    Keep up the great work guys

  28. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    because shitty writers can't make a sci-fi story without "m-muh solar panel fields" and "m-muh wind turbine fields" even though both suck and are a massive scam

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      how to tell someone bought into trump's bs just a bit too much

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        What's the orange man got to do with this? Actually research it, you'll see.

  29. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    those are blockchain databases

  30. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Isn't it just because he went to Las Vegas and the three solar farms south of Las Vegas make for a cool aerial picture?

  31. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    because it's cloudy

  32. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    its not cloudy the sun just turned blue

  33. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    That's the joke.

  34. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    central planners gonna central plan

  35. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >record heat waves
    >droughts everywhere
    >lakes drying up
    >record breaking storms each following year

    >SORRY IT'S ALL FAKE MADE UP LIBTURD BULLSHIT

  36. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I don't ecen bother reading these threads anymore because it's going to be homosexuals seething and repeating talking points they read somewhere else but don't really understand.
    Thanks for reading my blog

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >Thanks for reading my blog
      doh!

  37. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    For the sake of completeness I’ve found the numbers for Texas around the big feeeze in 2021.
    >generation for Jan21
    >coal 7959
    >NG 17756
    >nuclear 3799
    >wind 8700
    >Feb21
    >coal 6812
    >NG 17095
    >nuclear 3314
    >wind 7088

    Long story short, Texas grid generation from wind was around 23% leading into the big freeze. ERCOT, predictably, was lying to cover their ass.

  38. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    I'll have another go.
    Those molten salt power plants don't work.

  39. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    But, like, who cares? You'd have to be a real homosexual to care about birds.

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *