Page 3 of 16 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
13
... LastLast
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by GennGreymane View Post
    ITS COSTS SOME GOOD HONEST AMERICAN JOBS

    big green is trying to get into your head. They are corrupt liars who have infected our Government. Thank god for Trump. MAGA!
    The irony is that there are 10x more jobs in clean energy in CA alone than the entire coal industry in the US.

  2. #42
    It isn't. The bastards who make money off dirty energy want to keep making money from it, so they fund "research" saying its bad.

  3. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Taso View Post
    Don't forget the middle east, Nigeria,Norway and Venezuela just to name some.
    and none of those places have the military power to back their claims if someone tried to step to them. Also, if they get uppity they'll be getting a does of freedom and democracy just like every other place that's tried it... why do you think we're still fucking with the middle east =/

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by INVASMANIXOXOXO View Post
    I like the idea of nuclear, I really do. But I read that if you calculate all the energy you put into building/running it, extracting the fuel you barely break even by the time you have to start thinking about decommissioning it.
    Hehe, yeah I'm not sure if it is that bad, but the profit margin seems to be smaler these days. Around here every time one of them can squezze out another couple years of time they get to operate usually causes rich fucks to dance in the streets, because their calculation just got a whole lot better.

  5. #45
    Mechagnome Tailswipe's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    634
    Quote Originally Posted by pacox View Post
    Why is clean energy bad?
    Viable clean energy sources should be able to compete without government protection or mandated subsidies.

  6. #46
    The Insane Masark's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    17,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Tailswipe View Post
    Viable clean energy sources should be able to compete without government protection or mandated subsidies.
    It's difficult to compete against against a competitor that has license to kill and maim.

    Warning : Above post may contain snark and/or sarcasm. Try reparsing with the /s argument before replying.
    What the world has learned is that America is never more than one election away from losing its goddamned mind
    Quote Originally Posted by Howard Tayler
    Political conservatism is just atavism with extra syllables and a necktie.
    Me on Elite : Dangerous | My WoW characters

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Tailswipe View Post
    Viable clean energy sources should be able to compete without government protection or mandated subsidies.
    You do realize that there are government protections and mandated subsidies for fossil fuels right?

  8. #48
    Deleted
    I don't think i ever heard anyone claim it was bad...

    It has mostly to do with the big guys investing into the other kind of energy and their inability to go back on their choice.

  9. #49
    It is in the US, because America has such an incredibly rotten political sphere where any form of progressive policies are being fought tooth and nail by VERY strong economic interests at all times. The US really needs to strengthen their policies with regards to conflict of interest. I mean several department heads are responsible for regulating an industry they were previously a part of. The latest example (I think, hard to keep up) would be the ex-Verizon lawyer being the head of the FCC and now pushing to kill net neutrality.

    Since the oil/coil companies have a shitton of money they can buy significant political influence and spend tons of money on misinformation, which causes Americans to have record breaking disbelief in scientific concensus on climate change, and other issues as well.

  10. #50
    Epic! Masqerader's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Halifax, Nova Scotia
    Posts
    1,660
    It would turn billionaires into millionaires.

    And for a capitalist fascists country that isn't good.

  11. #51
    I'd like to point out that while clean energy is important. It's even more important to have renewable energy. A lot of people in this thread basically said money was the problem. Well, most people including the fossil fuel industry agree it isn't a problem anymore. They see a path to maintain their businesses and they are actively investing in it. That is why companies like Exxon have switched sides on the climate change debate. You won't see a lot of resistance unless you're getting your news from the 80's and 90's.

    Back to my point though. The price of energy effects the market more than the pollution it causes. Renewable energy can be very cheap since you don't have to dig it out of the ground or drill deep under the ocean. Once your initial investment is done it's pure profit minus maintenance. So it's a given that it will completely replace most fossil fuels in the near future based purely on better pricing. Of course renewable energy is also carbon neutral and creates less pollution. The pollution that it does create is easier to handle.

    And that is good.

    More attention should be given to generation four nuclear reactors. Much of our carbon neutral, air pollution free energy comes from nuclear right now. But the reactors are old and need to be replaced. Newer reactors are much safer and create much less waste. They are a good solution for areas that don't have a lot of wind and sun or don't have the money to build storage capacity into their grid. India for example. Or China.

    Transition technologies that pollute less and provide a smooth transition are great too. Here's an example. This is a fuel cell that's being developed. It uses gas like you would use for your oven or heater. But it doesn't burn it. It's has a very high efficiency (50%) and releases zero emissions at the point of use. So instead of having the inefficiencies of burning gas at a power plant and then delivering it over power lines to your home you produce it right inside your house. It's a great product for places where gas is cheap.


    http://www.cerespower.com/

  12. #52
    Natural gas is replacing coal in the US and that's why coal is in trouble, pulling out of the Paris Climate Accords isn't going to help that.


    .

    "This will be a fight against overwhelming odds from which survival cannot be expected. We will do what damage we can."

    -- Capt. Copeland

  13. #53
    Did they fix any of the problems that usually make fuel cells DOA?
    Like being heavy, low energy density,high maintenance, issues with the catalyst/electrolyte membrane, operating temperatures, etc..?

    Also you say it uses gas? So some kind of methane? What's the redox reaction here? Where does the carbon go?
    Last edited by Cosmic Janitor; 2017-06-02 at 07:10 AM.

  14. #54
    The Insane Acidbaron's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Belgium, Flanders
    Posts
    18,230
    Quote Originally Posted by potis View Post
    No one said clean energy is bad.

    Clean energy makes rich people that are based on fossil fuel, friends of governments poorer, therefor clean energy is bad.

    In other words, rich people like their status and influence in the world and are delaying it as much as possible, its not easy changing everything to clean energy.
    Nope Big oil is supporting those technologies and so are even the Saudies for the simple reason that it's the future, it's a highly profitable market once it fully breaks open as fossil continues to decline.

  15. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Acidbaron View Post
    Nope Big oil is supporting those technologies and so are even the Saudies for the simple reason that it's the future, it's a highly profitable market once it fully breaks open as fossil continues to decline.
    Yes cause they know they have to adapt, but they are doing so slowly, not at the speed they should be doing it thats my point.

  16. #56
    The Lightbringer Lollis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    3,522
    Quote Originally Posted by Mittens View Post
    It's not bad, it's not that good either. If it were up to me I'd get rid of NIMBYS and build nuclear, but that would require leftists to be sensible.
    "Leftists" aren't against nuclear power, idiots are.
    Speciation Is Gradual

  17. #57
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Teri View Post
    As long as corporations make a ton of money on Oil or Weapons, we won't get an easy way to clean energy world or global peace.

    Even on just solar panels alone there's a ton of competition on companies that don't want to share their ideas.
    Hear, hear!

    The Fall of Old The School Western Ways. <3


    ... and yet, they're after the North Pole -_-


    Also,

    http://nypost.com/2017/05/17/dubai-w...r-fresh-water/

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by Haidaes View Post
    Did they fix any of the problems that usually make fuel cells DOA?
    Like being heavy, low energy density,high maintenance, issues with the catalyst/electrolyte membrane, operating temperatures, etc..?

    Also you say it uses gas? So some kind of methane? What's the redox reaction here? Where does the carbon go?
    I would encourage you to watch the video and do more research on their site for specifics. I can tell you a few things though. They've sold 150k of them in Japan, apparently there is a big market there for them since they are shutting down their nuclear power plants.

    The fuel cells are made of steel and ceramic so they are very cheap and the catalyst is not made of rare elements. It seemed like a very compact unit. They showed a 1 kilowatt hour cell installed in a house. It was fairly compact about the 4 foot by 2 foot in size. It produced some heat but was negligible.

    It can run on hydrogen, biofuel or natural gas. It's not carbon neutral its low carbon. If you were running it on hydrogen produced from a renewable power plant then it would be though.

    They seem to be looking at ramping up production. In the near future.

    For more details you'll have to do more research on your own.

  19. #59
    Dreadlord Krothar's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    The Nerth, UK
    Posts
    933
    People like these two students make clean energy SEEM bad:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p8lY-AIhGbU

    What I mean is people need to fully understand all the facts before saying one or the other are bad. I'm not saying oil and the like is good nor am I denying the negative effects of them but "Clean Energy" has become such a buzz word these days that people just cling to it.

  20. #60
    It's "bad" because consumers can't afford to pay for it. If it could be done at a large scale cheaply, "clean" energy would replace oil and coal as quickly as the infrastructure could support it. Which is, in and of itself, another problem that is tied to consumer wealth. You cannot, for example, tell someone who earns $25k/year they need to buy a brand-new $30k automobile that is either battery-operated or uses some hypothetical exotic fuel, to replace the beater they can barely afford to keep on the road as is, because the economics of it just do not work out.
    OMG 13:37 - Then Jesus said to His disciples, "Cleave unto me, and I shall grant to thee the blessing of eternal salvation."

    And His disciples said unto Him, "Can we get Kings instead?"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •