brahs........

[Anonymous No.10863529]

[Anonymous No.10863535]

>>10863529
>wind's LCOE looks like that!!??!

[Anonymous No.10863772]

>wind+solar+lamb
>???
>profit

[Anonymous No.10863797]

>>10863529
Well, it isn't like you can't have that land for dual purposes. Like farming for instance. Not that it matters for like another 10k years before land space ever becomes a problem.

[Anonymous No.10863842]

>>10863797
Nuclear generates 1000kw per sq mtr and uses up a fraction of the land.

[Anonymous No.10863863]

>>10863797
Nuclear makes 1kw per sq mtr and uses up a fraction of the land.

[Anonymous No.10863920]

>>10863863
Not if you count the pile of radioactive waste it produces.

[Anonymous No.10863961]

>>10863920
Tell me the radioactive half-life of uranium and if you think depleted uranium can be reused in nuclear fission. As an aside solar panels are made up of lead, cadmium and antimony. Would you like to have a guess of these elements half-life and what you can do with them after the solar panels life expectancy of 25 years runs out?

[Anonymous No.10863966]

>>10863920
fire it into the sun, nuclear is literally the only way to go. Until we can nail that Fusion bitch.

[Anonymous No.10864005]

>>10863772
What if the sheep get wind cancer?

[Anonymous No.10864009]

>>10863529
I never understood the purpose of this argument. Stuff takes up space and that's bad?

[Anonymous No.10864013]

>>10863529
Why would you evaluate them using power per area? That's not a sensible metric for several reasons. Actually, how was the area even calculated? Don't tell me they took the empty land between towers into account...

[Anonymous No.10864016]

>>10863920
Coal actually produces a shitton of nuclear waste as well. The more you know...

[Anonymous No.10864022]

>>10863535
Wow nuclear's LCOE is INCREASING!

[Anonymous No.10864023]

>>10864013
>...

[Anonymous No.10864034]

>>10864022
Germania is tipping on 50% renewables and the United Emirates of France is still 80% nuclear. The cost of energy in France is 14.72 cents per kWh, one of the lowest in Europe. Germany pays 24 cents per kWh and rising.

[Anonymous No.10864058]

>>10864022
Funding for new reactors has dried up. New technologies aren't being developed nor implemented, and all that's left are obsolete and aging reactors.

[Anonymous No.10864081]

Wind is fucking shit tier and I can't believe people unironically defend it, not to mention it absolutely fucking ruins the landscape.

[Anonymous No.10864143]

>>10863966
>Until we can nail that Fusion bitch.
Weird how retards love fusion until somebody mentions the already existing fusion we could easily use that sits up in the sky.

[Anonymous No.10864146]

>>10864081
I'm sorry about your golf course Donald.

[Anonymous No.10864199]

>>10864143
>the fusion that only works optimally 30% of the time
Tell me how you plan to cover down time.

[Anonymous No.10864202]

>>10864199
It can't be cloudy everywhere.

[Anonymous No.10864243]

>>10864146
>HURRRR GONALD BLURMF DURRR

Im no Trump fan and you can fuck off to rebbit

[Anonymous No.10864251]

>>10864202
>my plan is to cover the entire planet is solar panels!
Ebin. Simply ebin. And as anon
>>10863961
points out when they wear out after 2 decades what are you going to do with the toxic waste?

[Anonymous No.10864264]

>>10863961
>solar panels are made up of lead, cadmium and antimony
>solar panels life expectancy of 25 years
Where did you find those 1997 talking points?

[Anonymous No.10864274]

>>10864251
Good thing panels are virtually entirely recyclable. So just make the old panels into new ones easy.

[Anonymous No.10864277]

>>10864264
Useful life expectancy is still around that mark, yes they will still work but they will have lost a large amount of production and it will continue to drop off steeply after that. So you are still going to have to be building hundreds of hectares of fields regularly. Yes panels are free of most nasty shit these days but it's more about the production process which you don't see because it's outsourced to China where they dump all the refining byproducts into rivers.

[Anonymous No.10864279]

>>10864277
Oh you found some 2007 talking points feel free to goalpost again.

[Anonymous No.10864280]

Nuclear is the energy magic bullet we have had for half a century. Can't wait to pave the rainforests with solar panels and windmills rather than just having a nuke station here and there.

[Anonymous No.10864286]

>>10864279
Debunk it then

[Anonymous No.10864288]

>>10864274
>>10864279
Why do greenfags resort to passive aggressive reddit cringe when they can't answer a question?

[Anonymous No.10864289]

>>10863529
Can we please just keep using coal and oil instead of larping as hippies?

[Anonymous No.10864292]

>>10864286
>Debunk it then
You made the claim which you knew was a lie and then proceeded to walk it back. I don't have to debunk shit.

[Anonymous No.10864294]

>>10864289
If it wasn't for fucking hippies we'd be nuclear and not having this discussion.

[Anonymous No.10864295]

>>10864280
> please return kindly to reddit

[Anonymous No.10864296]

>>10864274
Show me a 100% recycleable solar panel. I'll be downloading laughing reaction images while I wait.

[Anonymous No.10864299]

>>10864292
>I can't debunk shit
that's obvious.

[Anonymous No.10864303]

>>10864292
You can't debunk it because no manufacturer will offer any more warranty than 20-25 years.

[Anonymous No.10864307]

>>10864299
>>10864303
(you)

[Anonymous No.10864310]

>>10864307
>i COULD debunk it if i wanted to but i can't my dad works at nintendo and he'd get in trouble sry guize lol xd xd xd
pathetic

[Anonymous No.10864314]

>>10864307
Not an argument

[Anonymous No.10864315]

>>10864310
(you)

[Anonymous No.10864320]

>10864315
>10864307
Your (You)s are malformed

[Anonymous No.10864323]

>>10864315
imagine getting btfo so hard you resort to this

[Anonymous No.10864328]

The only place for solar is off grid homes or very high sunshine places like Australia or North Africa. Everything else should be fucking nuclear or you clearly lack a brain.

[Anonymous No.10864513]

>>10863529
they should be including only the ground occupied by the windmill's footprint in the calculation since that's all that's actually getting used

[Anonymous No.10865401]

>>10864081
>not to mention it absolutely fucking ruins the landscape.

You are in luck because the true potential for wind is offshore wind farms.

[Anonymous No.10865406]

>>10864081
>it absolutely fucking ruins the landscape.
Oh no, the majestic flat brown scrubland of south texas!

[Anonymous No.10865410]

>>10864081
Do you know Van Gogh the painter? Did you know he refused to paint Dutch windmills as they were brand new in his age and he considered that they were high-tech trash that ruined the view so he would draw landscapes without them.

Nowadays tourists literally come to the Netherlands to view the windmills while the locals originally considered them to be high-tech ugly shit.

Wind power generators are like this. In 200 years time people will view them as quaint and an addition to the landscape because they will be outdated and characteristical of a specific era in human history.

[Anonymous No.10865441]

>>10863863
WOW COOL NUCLEAR

[Anonymous No.10865446]

I see the nuclear shills are pretty active today.

[Anonymous No.10865449]

nuclear's a bottomless money pit

[Anonymous No.10865504]

>>10863863
I recall nuclear makes less power per sq mtr than solar because of the exclusion zone you need to maintain around nuclear plants.

[Anonymous No.10865529]

>>10864009
/thread

[Anonymous No.10866364]

>>10865446
>U GUIZE WE NEED TO GET OFF FOSSIL FUELS
>NO NOT THE POWER SOURCE WE DEVELOPED DECADES AGO I CAN'T CHARGE YOU A CARBON TAX IF WE USE THAT LOL XD XD

[Anonymous No.10866403]

>>10866364
based
>>10865446
chaste

[Anonymous No.10866410]

>>10866364
Sorry the US just isn't ready for the socialization of energy generation required to make nuclear economically viable.

[Anonymous No.10866470]

>>10865401
holy shit that's a great idea, why isn't everyone building those already?

[Anonymous No.10866484]

Why is this board getting dumber every day?

[Anonymous No.10866636]

>>10865410
>Do you know Van Gogh the painter? Did you know he refused to paint Dutch windmills as they were brand new in his age and he considered that they were high-tech trash that ruined the view so he would draw landscapes without them.
I don't see how that's possible since tower mills date from the 12th century and van Gogh dates from the 19th century.

[Anonymous No.10866640]

>>10866470
We still have lots of middle of fucking nowhere left on land.

[Anonymous No.10866654]

>>10863535
Would it kill these clowns to use lines that are NOT slight shades of each other?
Nuclear/Coal/Solar look too similar, Gas/Geothermal/Wind are all similar shades of grey.

[Anonymous No.10866664]

>>10863863
That excludes areas dedicated to
- mining
- refining
- recovery
- waste storage

[Anonymous No.10866839]

>>10863920
All of the nuclear waste from all reactors in the US starting from the first commercial plant to right now, would fit into half of a football stadium.

[Anonymous No.10866841]

electricity is haram

[Anonymous No.10866856]

Solid uranium pellets can only utilize 2-5% of the energy because of inactive isotopes becomes to much and gases start cracking the cladding.
If the uranium instead is dissolved in salt it's possible to extract useful isotopes for cancer treatment and end up with waste that only needs to be stored for a few hundred years.

[Anonymous No.10866894]

>>10865504
>>10865504
I find that highly unlikely, if you had to power the entirety of the US by nuclear fission plants, it would be about 400-600 sq km. For solar, optimizing for the sunniest regions and thereby minimizing footprint, would be 12,000+ sq km. Are you sure you aren't thinking of disaster zones?

[Anonymous No.10866916]

>>10864005
>tfw spit-take on keyboard when reading this

[Anonymous No.10867434]

>>10864199
b-batteries..?

[Anonymous No.10868379]

>>10866470
Installation/maintenance and cabling are a lot more expensive then on-shore wind farms. Salt water can also be corrosive.

[Anonymous No.10868381]

>>10864022
That's what happens when the nowadays rare act of building new reactors turns into a giant shitshow like this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olkiluoto_Nuclear_Power_Plant#Unit_3

[Anonymous No.10868467]

>>10868381
Votgle is like 3 times worse lmao

[Anonymous No.10868522]

>>10864022
Because they've choked the nuclear industry to death with regulation. All the reactors are old but they can't get new ones built for shit.

[Anonymous No.10869207]

>>10868522
Shills always say this but never site their sources

[Anonymous No.10869408]

>>10865504
>the exclusion zone you need to maintain around nuclear plants
Damn, all those nuclear powered carriers and subs must be a whole lot larger than they look in the pictures.

[Anonymous No.10869464]

>>10866916
Bahzinga.