WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2024 Poal.co

1.1K

(post is archived)

[–] 1 pt

So they get subsidies to install their wind mills, because it's not profitable to have wind mills in the first place. But even with the subsidies they can't make any money? So we are going to have to pay to subsidize them to be installed, then pay to bail them out because they weren't profitable? All because they think the evil CO2 is gonna make the average temp go up .5C after I'm dead?

Fuck off hippies.

[–] 0 pt

That's about the size of it.

What I don't understand (well, I do because it's not about having a balanced power plan it's about control) is why not use wind turbines, solar, nuclear, and natgas with one another, aka this balanced breakfast power generation plan? Renewable devices have their uses, but not at the scale we need to provide for. ea Coal, while it is the best source of thermal energy we can get in a "easy to use, doesn't explode when handled" transportable form, is never going to be a clean method of power generation. We should have looked to nuclear decades ago.

[–] 1 pt

We did, then three mile island happened. A direct result of the station operators taking the station out of "automatic", thinking they could manually stay ahead of the reactions. They could not. Added bonus: Closing nuke plants takes away all those good middle class jobs, in addition to removing stable power generation.