The cost is down, but it has an unsolvable limitation: it varies too much from day to day, and there is too little of it in the winter.
Batteries can help only so far.

it's nice as long as you understand it's limitations, that's why most people just use it to heat water

File: 1743241349221736.jpg (361.2 KB)

361.2 KB JPG

Irrelevant where I live

>>16902156
A rather inefficient way of getting power from fusion.

>>16902156
It's gay. All memes aside, electric won't be useful until way past the adoption of cold fusion
>sorry ladies

>>16902160
>Batteries can help only so far.
Okay. And what data is there that the so far isn't enough in winter?

>>16902156
I'm not watching a two hour video. Is there anything remotely interesting said there?

>>16902156
It's great. Best EROI, low maintenance, no dependence on oil cartels.
If you can't live with the limitations, it means you waste too much energy and should reconsider your way of living.

>>16902343
>Is there anything remotely interesting said there?
Yes. The last bit after the fake ending is a crash out against right wingers for science denialism and fascism and against "apolitical" dipshits for acting like politics has no effect on them or anything else.

God I love it when entertainers in fields not directly related to politics remind people politics is actually fucking important and you're a fucking cunt hiding from reality if you think otherwise. Bonus points for explaining exactly how politics relates to his field and why one party is significantly shittier than the other and driving home that it's a 2 party system whether you like it or fucking not and primaries are your venue for trying to change your party, not generals.

>>16902343
just copypaste the transcript into chatgpt and ask for a summary

>>16902156
Magic rocks that chainreact to boil water is better. People are just to scared and pussy about it because of propaganda.

>>16902369
God I love it when entertainers in fields not directly related to politics remind people that they have a very limited view of the complex world, taking the their desires for a particular reality to be magically true, and thinking that makes it how humanity should organize itself around the entertainer's area of intense interest.

> What is your opinion on solar energy?
A humble silicon becomes the cornerstone of civilization in one more area.
Amazing how a rock can become so powerful.

>>16902852
Republicans denying climate change because they're in the pocket of fossil fuel lobbyists isn't particularly complex, bro.

I think your limited view might be caused by your head being up your ass.

>>16902852
>taking the their desires for a particular reality to be magically true, and thinking that makes it how humanity should organize itself around the entertainer's area of intense interest.
Well yes. This is basically the motivation behind a republic.
It's a tacit admission that each group has a distinct set of motivations, no singular set of laws will satisfy everyone, and that motivated parties of various interests should make the case for the system that is optimized for their goal.

Solar generation is following a similar cost curve and utlilization to moores law. Battery tech also improving (plus you can do solar->methane storage at a certain price point).

>>16902156
I like the idea. But it doesn't seem practical on a large scale.

>>16903099
More practical than some shit we are already doing at a large scale.

>>16903037
>Republicans denying climate change because they're in the pocket of fossil fuel lobbyists isn't particularly complex, bro.
Not particularly explanatory either, bro. Almost everyone who thinks climate change is a gay hoax isn't in anyone's pocket. Meanwhile every scientist who wants to continue getting funding will parrot the narrative or be instantly blacklisted and have their research defended.

>>16903114
>Almost everyone who thinks climate change is a gay hoax isn't in anyone's pocket.
Useful idiots existing isn't a counterargument.
>Meanwhile every scientist who wants to continue getting funding will parrot the narrative or be instantly blacklisted and have their research defunded.
Ah yes, cause the fossil fuel industry isn't willing to pay for experts. Neither was the tobacco industry, right?

The idea that there is no money available for a counter narrative is fucking ridiculous at face value, and arguing that shit makes you a paid shill or a toddler. You're a fucking waste of carbon.

It's an old line, but you know who believes in climate change? Fucking fossil fuel companies.

>>16902852
did he say anything wrong faggot

>>16902156
They would need to make short- and long-range physical storage, coupled with a network.

>>16903185
Yeah, that bit about kidnapping brown people stood out almost right away.

Also the faggot never brought up Nuclear as an option which literally just blows away all of his cons and needs way less space for clean and efficient energy. SO there's also a lie by omission.

>>16902852
I also love it when said entertainer takes the complaints about something, goes to 1 area, then decrees "All of those complaints are stupid because I didn't personally experience them in this 1 spot."

>>16903185
>did he say anything wrong faggot
In that same shot, he very brazenly tried to say "Well you don't have to worry about fuel in an electric car in the middle of the country where no one has these gay-ass electric things, because people's houses have electricity!" The problem is that he himself has a video going over how inefficient American outlets are in general. You need to install special converters directly onto your home's power grid to make an outlet good enough for the car, otherwise even a full overnight won't get you anywhere near the energy you need. Meaning if your "friend with electricity!" doesn't have that gay-ass converter, you're going to be staying there an extra three nights and then lose the friend when they get the power bill charging up your faggot-mobile.

>>16903213
>>16903208
talking about the politics part at the end

>>16903208
>Also the faggot never brought up Nuclear as an option which literally just blows away all of his cons and needs way less space for clean and efficient energy
Nuclear energy is literally the least cost efficient energy source there is, even if it's highly sustainable, due to regulatory hurdles and storing all the waste (a reminder that we still do not have long term storage for that shit) and keeping the generator running.

It also requires a water supply for cooling even if you're using the salt version, which means where it can be built is more restricted than solar, and it produces a lot of waste heat which is bad for the environment.

Given the points he was arguing for solar on, it wouldn't make much sense to bring up nuclear if he wasn't doing it just to shit on it.

Honestly unless we get fusion working, nuclear is at best an alternative to batteries in conjunction with solar, being able to provide a baseline level of power when wind/solar supply is disrupted that is cleaner than fossil fuels and less restrictive than shit like hydro/tidal/geothermal. But it's a very fucking expensive battery.

I think the window for nuclear being viable in the USA passed. Maybe it's still got a place in high population density countries that want to avoid fossil fuels though.

>>16903213
>The problem is that he himself has a video going over how inefficient American outlets are in general.
No. He doesn't.
>You need to install special converters directly onto your home's power grid to make an outlet good enough for the car
He literally says you can get 4-5 miles per hour of charge from a regular ass wall outlet. How long is your regular commute?

Also running a new higher power circuit for most homes is only going to be a few hundred dollars if you want/need to do that. Factoring that shit into the cost of a car isn't some insane ask. It's a slightly larger upfront cost for half as much fuel costs and much lower maintenance costs over the lifespan of the vehicle. And you only have to pay it for your first fucking electric vehicle if you even have to at all.

Unless you live in an apartment with no EV infrastructure or some sort of protected building that's illegal to renovate and doesn't have any workable outlets near where you park, charging is literally no reason to not get an EV. Did you even watch his video?

>>16902156
It's great at lower latitudes, Bangladesh has proven it's cheap enough for even poor countries to make the switch.

>>16903217
Holy reddit barely surface level understanding.
>muh storage
>muh waste heat
Any real discussion of high cost of nuclear in the USA is mostly from an inexperienced work force and poor supply chain. The company supplying the pumps vogtle units 3 and 4 or any other major part have no incentive to make a more efficient manufacturing process if all they need to build is 4 of them. Overly cumbersome regulations do restrict getting the project started, but that's only the start of the problems. Countries that have a work force that do regularly build reactors to build them on time and on budget, Russia, China and South Korea.
And if course batteries won't last a city through a snow storm retard.

>>16903217
>storing all the waste
lol immediate midwit flag, waste dispossl has been solved for decades, you store it in a dry cask on site, which is incredibly cheap, also what you call waste is actually mostly useful isotopes that can be re-used in the reactors but often isn't because of regulation or lack of approval for reactors designed to use the "waste" to make more fuel
>It also requires a water supply for cooling which means where it can be built is more restricted than solar
true but you also need orders of magnitude fewer reactors than you do solar panels, and they provide an immense base load that doesn't waver with the weather
also we can very easily run reactors by the ocean that are partially or entirely dedicated to desalination, which is useful for more than just reactors
>it produces a lot of waste heat which is bad for the environment.
lol what the fuck are you smoking nigga

How long do panels last these days?
I'm not watching a 2 hour video to find out

>>16902156
Good for off grid and certain regions, not a practical solution for a primary grid supply.

>>16902369
Hi Alec. Instead of going nuclear on Trump, you should have gone nuclear, period. Renewables are a meme, see France and Germany for the perfect case study.

Nobody worth entertaining is arguing that electric cars aren't a viable tool of personal transportation. The real issue is right under his nose. He admits to having the luxury of long-term planning, something not everyone is privileged enough to even consider.
America is extremely car-dependent, and without a car, you are SOL if you don't live in a dense urban area with a job within walking distance. If you're poor and live in a precarious environment, you have no choice but to rely on shitty inefficient cars with a low upfront cost.

>>16903266
Maybe if your government would build housing in cities for poor people, they wouldn't need cars.

>>16902156
One does not need an opinion on how electricity is produced unless you are looking to invest into a power plant yourself. It's all the same to you when it comes out the outlet. Only the price matters.

>>16902369
>>16902852
It's sort of funny how he is just correct about basically everything in his factual portion of the video and then in the rant portion is just factually wrong about most things which instantly paints the first section as suspect by association. This is why people who don't exclusively do political content tend to stay away from it on principle. Sperging out just alienates you from everyone.

>>16903252
25 years is a typical number before they probably could use replacing.

>>16903266
Bad take because advice to buy an electric car isn't aimed for the guy that has to buy a 200 dollar rust bucket to survive his 4 hour commute. It's aimed at the vast majority of american consumers who regularly buy a new cars, the most popular models which also happen to be some of the most expensive ones too, to exclusively use on short trips between their residence, work and grocery store.

>>16902156
Fine for single family homes and off grid situations. Totally irrelevant for base load capacity compared to nuclear.

>>16903269
>and then in the rant portion is just factually wrong about most things
Likw what?

>>16903037
Reps want climate change to happen faster and faster so the permafrost in greenland melts down and allows for mining

>>16902156
Unlimited energy, unlimited real estate, as long as cost to launch is cheap enough.

>>16903292
They don't want Greenland for mining. They want it for control of global shipping. Mining nowadays is mostly about refining what you can pull up more than it is finding deposits.

>>16903260
>Renewables are a meme, see France and Germany for the perfect case study.

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_France
>Solar power in France including overseas territories reached an installed capacity figure of 24.5 gigawatts (GW) at the end of 2023, up from 17.1 GW at the end of 2022 and just 11.2 GW in 2020.[1][2][3] The country currently has the eleventh-most solar capacity in the world and the fourth-most in Europe, behind Germany, Spain, and Italy. Government plans announced in 2022 foresee solar PV capacity in France rising to 100 GW by 2050.

>https://livingarchitecturemonitor.com/news/new-law-in-france-green-roofs-on-all-new-commercial-buildings
>The French Parliament recently approved a new law requiring all new commercial buildings to partially have their roofs covered with plants or solar panels. The new requirement will apply to all new buildings in commercial zones.

God DAMN you people are fucking stupid.

>>16902369
Damn he sounds based

>>16902156
Morons were spamming bullshit that solar power is much cheap, so free for 50 years and now that it's somewhat true since about 2017 (at least in some circumstances) nobody bothers to look into it.

>>16903268
Go tell him. I live in a bike-friendly country and have never owned a car. I would never trade that away.

>>16903269
That just corroborates the underlying issue. America being car-dependent IS the problem. Just because you aren't burning fuel doesn't mean your mode of transportation is desirable for the greater good.

>>16903242
>And if course batteries won't last a city through a snow storm retard.
Why?

>>16903247
> waste dispossl has been solved for decades
>, you store it in a dry cask on site
The largest source of nuclear waste by volume from nuclear power plants is radioactive wastewater, you fucking dipshit. We aren't talking about spent fuel rods.

>lol what the fuck are you smoking nigga
Nuclear power plants aren't closed systems. They take in water from a nearby body and discharge heated water as part of their temperature management. Said heated water fucks with the ecosystems it gets dumped into. An example is manatees getting attracted to discharge sites in the cold instead moving south to warmer water. It's like how ducks end up staying in cities cause of heat islands instead of migrating south. Dumping a bunch of heat into an ecosystem can kill a bunch of local life forms, feed toxic algal blooms, attract shit that's not supposed to be there, etc.

If you don't even know what a waste heat treatment lagoon is, you shouldn't be calling me a midwit.

File: montel energy brainpool 2020 figure.png (66.9 KB)

66.9 KB PNG

>>16903305
>Behind two countries with a lower population
>The only EU country with a higher population is the subject of comparison
>percapitalitmustest.png
>Spews absolute numbers in isolation as if they are meaningful on their own
You're not as smart as you think you are.

>https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14786451.2024.2355642
>Germany has one of the most ambitious energy transition policies dubbed ‘Die Energiewende’ to replace nuclear- and fossil power with renewables such as wind-, solar- and biopower.
>We see that nuclear power is completely missing from the mix by 2023, whereas renewables including hydro, biomass and VREs grew substantially.
>However, regardless of uncertainties in data and assumptions, there can be no doubt that if the political environment in Germany had been favourable to NPPs in 2002, the country would have fared far better than with the current Energiewende both concerning expenditures and climate gas emissions. In the grand scheme, the alternative policy of keeping existing NPPs in 2002 and building new NPPs would have cut expenditures in half and Germany would have secured its climate goals in the process.

>>16903314
The reactor is a closed system and heat exchangers are used to isolate irradiated water. The iconic cooling towers on site are not cooling some kind of irradiated water and letting it evaporate into the atmosphere.

Home window + solar panel + resistive heater.

Obviously the home receives a bonus to heating based on the electrical output of the solar panel. But is there any value gained versus placing a black fleece blanket in the same area or just letting the sunlight enter the beige room? Assume that the air circulates well enough in the gap between the glass and the panel to both prevent overheating and to equalize with the room.

>>16903314
are you one of the retards who was pissing and shitting your pants when fukushima dumped their water into the ocean?

>>16902196
It is an effective method of wirelessly receiving power at a distance of 1AU or further.

>>16902156
until it gets above 50% efficiency it is just a novelty.

File: pool_safe.png (21 KB)

21 KB PNG

>>16903314
>radioactive wastewater

File: zoomer.gif (3.4 MB)

3.4 MB GIF

>>16902343
>I'm not watching a two hour video.
lazy worthless zoomers

>>16903351
idr who it was but I remember there was a dude who managed a npp or held some kind of higher level position there before the regulations got insane, and he was telling a story about how he used to swim in the spent fuel pool since it was warm and how he scared the new employees by doing it

>>16902377
what a retarded thing to do.

>>16903351
>>16903354
You wouldn't want to ingest any nuclear pool water for the same reason you don't want to breathe radon. Alpha and beta decay is relatively harmless when blocked by the skin, but the risk of cellular damage or DNA damage is much higher when that decay occurs within your body.

>>16903333
>Germany had a fuckton of nuclear power in 2002
>This means that nuclear is more viable than solar in 2026
Wat?

>>16903340
>The iconic cooling towers on site are not cooling some kind of irradiated water and letting it evaporate into the atmosphere.
Yeah, no shit. Waste heat in water and wastewater aren't the same fucking shit and I never said they were, fucking halfwit.

>>16903344
>are you one of the retards who was pissing and shitting your pants when fukushima dumped their water into the ocean?
No.

>>16903353
to be fair he doesn't say anything that most people don't already know, and wastes 15 minutes on irrelevant politics when he should be calling out the heavy anti nuclear sentiment on his own side

>>16903371
>This means that nuclear is more viable than solar in 2026
*Would have been

>>16903353
His videos can be summed up in one or two sentences most of the time. It's the youtube monetization format that drives people to stretch their points to 10-20 minute videos which is somewhat understandable. But this dude is some sort of a narcissist that can't stop at 20 minutes but has to do lengthy video upon video on same topic when he doesn't have that much to say.

In 2026 the solar politics is exclusively about government subsidies. Putting solar on your house, buying an electric or hybrid car and having an electric lawnmower is all about the consumer's cost/benefit analysis. The intangibles such as the consumer feeling good or gaining social status for "helping the environment" is a benefit factor. The consumer's imagined or real social benefit of being "environmentally conscious does not mean there is any physical benefit to the environment.

If you want a fuel efficient car with a low cost of ownership a lightly used hybrid is probably the most efficient. If you can leverage cheap electricity (home solar can have savings over grid electricity) and calculate the cost of car ownership a plug-in-hybrid or electric car can be economical.

A regular hybrid tends to have slightly better cost and fuel efficiency over a plug-in(that isn't plugged in) due to the smaller battery pack, but obviously doesn't have the ability for all-electric operation on short trips or home charging to further reduce fuel usage.

>>16903379
>*Would have been
I'm pretty sure even if you exclude the cost of permitting and constructing a nuclear plant and just focus on maintenance, materials, and staffing and other costs associated with maintaining one, the cost per unit of energy of nuclear is higher than new wind/solar.

Also nuclear plants have lifespans just like everything else so it'd get outmoded by wind and solar eventually even if there were a bunch of operating plants still around.

That said feel free to shit on German politicians getting bought out by Russian oil lobbyists and killing a bunch of nuclear projects that should have been kept around in some of the most naked corruption European politics has seen (which is saying a lot). Just cause betting on nuclear over other renewables doesn't make sense now doesn't mean betting on nuclear over fossil fuels didn't make sense then.

i think solar is great for charging smartphones

>>16903398
Many NPP's have operated for more than half a century and continue to do so with proper maintenance. Wind turbines undergo plenty of ageing themselves.
The inertia argument is a sunk cost fallacy. Germany is but one example. My country never had any nuclear power plants to begin and went all in on wind, only to, pardon the pun, wind up with higher coal-based energy production than France despite having less than 10% of the population.

>>16903410
>Many NPP's have operated for more than half a century
and are on their last legs. A lifespan is a lifespan.

>Wind turbines undergo plenty of ageing themselves.
Right, but repairing/replacing wind turbines/solar panels is cheaper than repairing/replacing nuclear plants at this point if we're talking equivalent energy production.

solar energy is negative dark energy.

>>16903413
It's also not a number set in stone. Contrary to popular belief, nuclear has not stagnated. SMR's are being deployed in China and Russia en masse as we speak.
Theoretical capacity is also rather moot without accounting for the very real fluctuations that exist in supply and demand. Coal persists in spite of our efforts to go renewable exactly because of this logistical nightmare, which adds its own "hidden", but massive costs.

>>16903419
>Coal persists in spite of our efforts to go renewable exactly because of this logistical nightmare
Coal persists?

>https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=54559
>Nearly a quarter of the operating U.S. coal-fired fleet scheduled to retire by 2029
>The last large (greater than 100 MW) coal-fired power plant built in the United States was the 932 MW Sandy Creek Energy Station in Texas, which came online in 2013. As of September 2022, developers have not reported any plans to build new U.S. coal-fired capacity in the future.

Seems more like it's dying a slow, painful death. Also
>Refined coal, which is made by mixing proprietary additives to feedstock coal, benefited from a tax credit that expired in early 2022.
>2022
Republicans don't get enough hate.

>>16903422
>>16903419
Oh, also
>https://ieefa.org/resources/newest-big-us-coal-plant-offline-until-2027
>The two-year outage at Sandy Creek

File: death-rates-from-energy-producti.png (45.1 KB)

45.1 KB PNG

>>16903422
>Coal persists?
The devil incarnate.

>>16903305
>capacity
Kek this nigga

>>16903167
>It's an old line, but you know who believes in climate change? Fucking fossil fuel companies.
Then why do they want to make climate change worse?

>>16903425
just when you thought coal was bad, they made it brown

>>16903451
>Then why do they want to make climate change worse?
Cause the shareholders aren't rich enough yet.

>>16902156
Decent emergency/supplemental electricity source, but impractical for everyday use.

>OP pic
That guy handwaved and glossed over any practical concerns with storage and generation. And his "It's so cheap!" evangelizing is going to ring hollow when China implodes. China's green facade is the only thing making solar cheap.

>Dude there are no dead birds here. Do you see any? Thought so
What kind of kindergarten argumentation is that? This is not how you communicate facts to someone who is old enough to vote and isn't a MAGAtard.

>>16903512
Since you've proven yourself to be castrated up there as well as down there, you're a lobotamized retard by all definition.

>>16903462
so buy now, make a solar plant, then sell off when it becomes expensive.

>>16903223
>No. He doesn't.
He does. He talks about it in the video going over the electric kettles used to make tea. Brits have better electrical outputs that can go higher, which boils their water in their kettles faster.

>>16903223
>He literally says you can get 4-5 miles per hour of charge from a regular ass wall outlet.
Sure, but that still means that going from empty/near empty on a 120v unmodified American outlet is going to take 24-40+ hours depending on battery size.
https://www.transportation.gov/rural/ev/toolkit/ev-basics/charging-speeds

>How long is your regular commute?
We're not discussing the average commute (which according to a lazy Google AI answer is like 12-19 miles one-way). We're addressing his lazy idea that "Oh driving in the country isn't a problem! People have wall outlets!" which would not entail a simple overnight stay if you're on a long distance hike, and then you also have to factor that a country commute is likely to be longer.

But even if we want to just talk about city-only, instead of worrying about this shit, we should be doing what the Nordic countries did and remove our auto NGOs out of our business and restructure our cities to get rid of all the fucking stroads.
https://youtu.be/ORzNZUeUHAM?si=q9_8sKavSC5Rg104

Then that way we can get solar panels just fine (or better, nuclear) AND encourage bicycle use.

>>16903269
>It's sort of funny how he is just correct about basically everything in his factual portion of the video and then in the rant portion is just factually wrong about most things which instantly paints the first section as suspect by association.
You're supposed to put the lies first followed by truth at the end to anchor it. He did it exactly backwards. What a retard.

>>16903366
Men in the navy drink primary coolant when doing samples for the fun of it because it makes the detector go crazy when you hold it to your chest. The worst you're going to get is a little bit of short lived oxygen and nitrogen.
>radon
You aren't going to get that or anything else from sealed fuel bundles.

>>16903462
>Decent emergency/supplemental electricity source, but impractical for everyday use.
It's the opposite in usual cases when the power lines have been broken it's because of a storm and guess what comes with storms.
Clouds

>>16903269
>>16903587
What makes it even worse and shows that he's entering into a topic he has obviously diverted absolutely 0% of autism he has around the math of renewable and efficient energy is that he's asking for government intervention, which history shows time and time again is absolutely the worst thing you could ever possibly do in order to get the outcome you desired. He even brought up an open market concept in the video (returning cores of batteries for a discount so the companies can recycle them) and then STILL diverges into his commie mindset.

Shit like this ironically keeps me humble. Everyone has something they're good at, and can still be retarded at almost everything else. I have to keep that in mind any time I step outside of the topics I'm comfortable in, otherwise I might look like a retarded clown like he does in his TDS rant.

File: inigo.jpg (54.6 KB)

54.6 KB JPG

>>16903380
>narcissist
he's the complete opposite of a narcissist. narcissists make everything about them, they take credit for everything they agree with that happens, and never accept responsibility for shit that goes wrong.. sounds like a certain orange baboon.

a narcissist is not someone who makes long videos about things that they believe in and then supposedly goons watching themselves. I've watched nearly all his videos from start to finish for the last couple of years.

he's pissing in the ocean, but he is not a narcissist.

>>16903587
except he is right about everything.

File: 3-Learning-curves-for-electricity-prices.png (165.5 KB)

165.5 KB PNG

Solar price per kw is dropping so rapidly that its outcompeting drilling for natural gas for electricity even without subsidies.
DOE goal for solar price by 2030 is $0.03 per KW.
Storage is solvable and theres plenty of space on the roofs of buildings and over parking lots.

Theres also new battery tech that can help with storage issues.

By the 2040s-2050s its possible solar->methane beats drilling for natural gas.

>>16903223
> Unless you live in an apartment with no EV infrastructure or some sort of protected building that's illegal to renovate and doesn't have any workable outlets near where you park, charging is literally no reason to not get an EV. Did you even watch his video?

A huge number of people live in small apartment buildings (2-10 units) with only on-street/lot parking. They do not have the luxury of this charging infrastructure, and it's only getting harder to purchase independent houses every year.

>>16903628
>Theres also new battery tech that can help with storage issues.
>can help
Unless it's a complete solution, it's not a solution at all.

>>16903213
Electric cars in the US generally come with 120V chargers you can just throw in the trunk. I don't know where this idea keeps coming from but you can charge on 120V. You don't need any "converter" or anything to charge.
Unless you are using a friend's house as the midpoint of a cross-country trek you should be able to get a meaningful charge out of it.
Also, just slide your friend some green if they get uppity. Cash, grass, or ass we already figured this one out.

File: 2026-02-01 19_45_03-duckduckgo.com__t=ffab&q=Traits+of+a+narcissist — Mozilla Firefox.jpg (127.9 KB)

127.9 KB JPG

>>16903620
I dunno man, he's meeting a lot of the traits here. Source: DuckDuckGo AI when I did a lookup of "Traits of a narcissist." I try to capture the search whenever I post AI for scrutiny, but it got long-winded.

>>16903725
>Electric cars in the US generally come with 120V chargers you can just throw in the trunk. I don't know where this idea keeps coming from but you can charge on 120V. You don't need any "converter" or anything to charge.
Yes, but to have a quicker charge time on the car, you need a converter installed in order to get that quicker time, and until there's a higher adoption rate of electric cars, those are going to be much more limited.

Either way, it's not even really an issue I have with the car, it's just that he's being a snarky fuck in the video and trying to downplay people's concerns about their situations by poopooing it away with "Bro just plug in!" when that isn't as simple as he's making it out to be, least of all to be deserving of that tone.

>>16903628
Reported solar energy prices are bullshit because during the day there's too much of it - so the price it is bought for goes super low (or sometimes even negative), meanwhile at night they don't produce anything - there's nothing to buy (at any price) - and as there's no trade, there's no data points - price isn't adjusted correctly to give accurate figure.
And then it is compared to other energy sources that get super expensive (as they can't keep up with the demand) to compensate for the hole left by the solar.

>>16902156
It's finger lickin' good.

>>16903640
Yes. I'm aware. I don't recall saying EVs were for everyone and I'm sure people that live in apartments are acutely aware that they have no place to charge an EV. I also don't think they should be expected to buy solar panels. We are having a non-argument.

>>16903581
>Sure, but that still means that going from empty/near empty on a 120v unmodified American outlet is going to take 24-40+ hours depending on battery size.
Okay, but you don't need to start driving on a full charge, nor is your average driver going to regularly go to empty/near empty. And for when you need that larger capacity, it will probably be because you're going on a trip which is what EV charging stations and that larger capacity exist for. A fully charged EV can go for hundreds of miles. Realistically all your home charging needs to handle is your commute.

>Oh driving in the country isn't a problem!
Yeah, EVs aren't for everyone. Some people unfortunately have really long commutes. The median American driver has a 42 mile daily commute though and could get by just fine charging their EV at home in a regular wall outlet.

>But even if we want to just talk about city-only, instead of worrying about this shit, we should be doing what the Nordic countries did and remove our auto NGOs out of our business and restructure our cities to get rid of all the fucking stroads.
I somehow doubt he's anti public transport/bikes. It's possible to be for both marginal and large improvements. Also, bike lanes/a city bus aren't going to help the dude out in the sticks that has a 100 mile daily commute either. Some people just need cars and we should be encouraging them to switch to EVs and building EV friendly infrastructure.

>>16903602
The idea that government shouldn't be involved in energy production when it is and literally always has been is so laughably fucking stupid that I question your ability to function. Who the fuck dresses and feeds you?

>>16903696
>Unless it's a complete solution, it's not a solution at all.
It is literally a complete solution. There isn't some physical limit on the number of batteries you can build that would kick in before the need was met. Also, what a dumbshit take. Imagine applying this bullshit to reservoirs.
>Well, we wouldn't be able to store literally infinite water, so we better not create a reservoir here.

>>16903733
>Yes, but to have a quicker charge time on the car
You don't need a fucking quicker charge time on the car. FFS how the fuck do you think most people live?

You're acting like EVs being impractical for some people mean they have no redeeming qualities for anyone.

>trying to downplay people's concerns
Yes. He is trying to downplay people's concerns because most concerns are bullshit spread by concern trolls like you. He has other fucking videos where he gets into the weeds and the shit he says in the video is true for general use cases.

>>16903792
See, I agree with most of this, but the problem is that he's being aggressively condescending about trying to get everyone to move to this "objectively superior" mode of transportation, then going on a 15 minute long ass political rant trying to radicalize people into getting the government to force this on everyone. He even admits that he had to have a friend to tell him that not everyone "gets" how he feels about energy before the rant, before going on the same rant. He's failing the sally-anne test at a VERY high IQ threshold.

>It's possible to be for both marginal and large improvements
He's not even really for this. He outright says he's not going to get solar on his house (marginal improvement) purely because his city had a solar farm (large improvement). He wants to force the whole country to adopt his energy plans at gunpoint.

>>16903795
>The government fucks shit up already, so you're stupid for insisting they shouldn't fuck it up any more.

>>16903798
>You don't need a fucking quicker charge time on the car.
How do you know that I don't? How do you know that most American's don't? Why don't you just let me decide my needs for me instead of forcibly taking away my choice, and instead just focus on giving me good incentives to take your option instead?

>You're acting like EVs being impractical for some people mean they have no redeeming qualities for anyone.
That's a strawman you're attacking. The issue is the fag in the video is getting smug and condescending and trying to enact political change because of Big Renewable Energy Autism™. Yes, even WITH those "into the weeds" videos, he cannot decide my needs or wants for me and should not have the power to do so. He should offer the pros and cons, then step to the side.

>>16903811
>He should offer the pros and cons, then step to the side.
So nobody is allowed to advocate for things they want? Then you can shut the fuck up.

>>16903812
No sweaty, people should not be allowed to advocate for the way others live their life with a gun pointed to their head, because that's called "slavery."

>>16903305
the entire reason why the US had to blow up Nordstream 2 is because of Germany being fucktarded about renewables.

Only renewable energy worth its salt is hydro.

>>16903817
>Only renewable energy worth its salt is hydro.
You should maybe take a look at the state of Europe's rivers.

File: FXr8qnBUsAQgX2i.jpg (148 KB)

148 KB JPG

>>16903811
>then going on a 15 minute long ass political rant trying to radicalize people into getting the government to force this on everyone
Literally the only thing he calls for the government to do in regards to cars is stop mandating ethanol. I would think you would be for that.

>He wants to force the whole country to adopt his energy plans at gunpoint.
Explain what is special about the government signing off on and subsidizing solar that would be different from how it treats literally any other form of energy production or why you would be forced to use solar instead of hooking up your house to a generator or something? Where is the gun?

His entire fucking argument is companies are getting into solar on their fucking own because it makes perfect fucking fiscal sense. It is inevitable.

>How do you know that I don't?
Cause if you did, you wouldn't be bitching cause he wouldn't be talking to you. Although maybe your arguing in such bad faith that you wouldn't have an issue.
>How do you know that most American's don't?
Cause how much Americans drive is well-studied and your a disingenuous cunt for even asking.

>Why don't you just let me decide my needs for me instead of forcibly taking away my choice
Quote him calling for that. Cunt.

File: ab67616d0000b273c164b1a439733e92b5044700.jpg (291.1 KB)

291.1 KB JPG

>capacity
>projected price
>prospective solutions in battery tech

>>16903838
>Explain what is special about the government signing off on and subsidizing solar that would be different from how it treats literally any other form of energy production
Didn't he specifically tell you, multiple times, that there is nothing fundamentally "special" going on? It'll be yet another instance in the endless series of incidents where the criminals you call a government take control of something and make everyone's life worse.

>or why you would be forced to use solar instead of hooking up your house to a generator or something?
Because once they set up their new energy control grid and masses of golems like you get used to it and take it for granted, they'll make sure alternatives are unavailable or exorbitantly priced.

>>16903852
>Because once they set up their new energy control grid
Oh, you're mentally ill.

>>16902156
It's turned into a pretty attractive investment. The cells can pay themselves off pretty quickly these days. Managing and balancing batteries looks like pain, but any kind of maintenance always is.
You're probably going to want to diversify with wind or hydro if you're going totally off grid

>>16903859
Obvious projection. Denial of reality is delusion. Delusion is indeed a symptom of serious mental illness.

File: file.png (1.3 KB)

1.3 KB PNG

>>16903425
How?
Did a solar panel fall on their head?

>>16903868
The biggest problem i have with solar right now is the fact that my government is subsidising both the construction of solar farms and the energy generated from them.
I can subsitiding the construction for new farmers but we subsidize everyone.
What I don't understand is why the fuck we subsidize electricity generation.
You don't need to do anything. At best wash them once a month. You can even tell the guys who herd sheep or something to come into your fields and let the sheep eat the grass.

>>16903929
they have no competitive advantage if it isn't funded by stealing. No matter how they whinge about advantages, the market disagrees and so the global pederasts steal from taxpayers to push the agenda. Meanwhile Texas has had hundreds of millions wasted on these cuck panels when they are destroyed by weather - the perfect grift to plea for yet more taxes, you want power right?
No. The libshit and the elite lost their right to complain to demand subservience when they failed the nuclear filter. They only want second-rate excuses to pillage the treasury.

>>16903929
Solar has to be subsidized to compete with all the subsidization for other forms of energy.

>>16903838
>Where is the gun?
You do understand what a law is and how its enforced, right?

>Cause if you did, blah blah blah my headcannon
Don't assume things.

>Quote him calling for that. Cunt.
"I'm political and this is political". You do understand what a law is and how its enforced, right?

>>16903859
I think this post answered that you don't understand what laws are and how they are enforced. Alex, you really need to study actual real history from people that aren't Marxist clowns dressed as professors. It would benefit you greatly.

>>16903926
Probably people falling off roofs installing them.

>>16904050
>You do understand what a law is and how its enforced, right?
And what law did he propose that you're butthurt about?

By the way, there's a difference between a law and a regulation. Naming a post office is a law.

File: 352.jpg (50.4 KB)

50.4 KB JPG

I live in a country where it's sunny 75-80% of the of the year. My dad has solar panels on top of his small factory and it gives plenty of power, he even has excess which he sells back to the county.

Thank god we don't have hail storms here although everything is insured obviously.

Other than that I haven't looked much into it, just speaking from personal experience.

>>16902156
Is such a beautiful technology. If energy storage was at the same level it would be fucking perfect.

>>16903926
the type that reflects light onto a central tower. Probably fried a few retards

>>16903926
If you don't cover the panel or short out the leads, the things start acting like high voltage self charging capacitors.

>>16902156
At best complementary to nuclear, completely impossible to run a grid on only solar and wind, would get wild grid frequency variations.

>>16903539
Why are you talking to yourself in second person?

>>16904114
>Well he didn't actually SAW he wrote a law! That makes my argument immune to critique!
Too bad he said that "this is political and I am about politics," meaning that he is coaxing a mindset to make policy aka laws that are enforced/fucked up by people with guns.

>>16904519
>Too bad he said that "this is political and I am about politics," meaning that he is coaxing a mindset to make policy aka laws that are enforced/fucked up by people with guns.
Nutter butter, most laws don't have an enforcement mechanism.

Wanting governments to sign off on more solar projects isn't putting a gun to your head.

>>16902369
>God I love it when entertainers in fields not directly related to politics remind people politics is actually fucking important and you're a fucking cunt hiding from reality if you think otherwise. Bonus points for explaining exactly how politics relates to his field and why one party is significantly shittier than the other and driving home that it's a 2 party system whether you like it or fucking not and primaries are your venue for trying to change your party, not generals.
That's why I'm voting for increased ICE support and more deportations.

>>16904666
Based. Dems will need an unaccountable paramilitary force with plenty of funding to clean up this country when they sweep back in power. Good thing all those pesky laws preventing government workers from getting fired and replaced are gone.

>>16902156
Anyone who ignores nuclear is not serious about reducing carbon emissions.

>>16904650
Well it is, because the money to pay for those incentives that they are royally fucking up is coming from us. On threat of gun to your head. It's not a second order problem but a 5th+ order problem that you need to think through.

>>16904681
>It's evil to tell people to vote based on public utility policy because taxation is theft
Actually die in a hole.

If you think taxation is theft, why don't you report it to the police? OH WAIT!

>>16904686
Cause the people stealing from me have guns, numbnuts.

>>16902357
>no dependence on oil cartels.
https://energytheory.com/how-much-oil-does-it-take-to-make-a-solar-panel/
>To generate the world’s current solar electricity output, which is approximately 87 TWh/day, it takes around 17 million barrels of oil per day.
I bet you don't know that wind turbines also require a ton of oil to function.

>>16904716
That's how much oil would have to be burned to replace the world's current electrical output from solar, not how much oil is burned daily to keep that shit in service.

Also, that's an AI author which means the entire article is worthless. The article reading like nonsense and the writer churning out a thousand articles in less than a year and only existing on that website didn't make you wonder if it might be legit?

>>16904734
The preceding sentence literally proves you wrong and says
>As we have seen, manufacturing a solar panel is a complex process and involves many steps where oil is used. It becomes difficult to know exactly how much oil is used in production. The reason for this is the difference in the working of manufacturing sites.
While the page goes on to say in the very next paragraph
>Oil has various applications in the manufacturing process in every sector and so is in the making of solar panels. Oil is majorly used in the transportation of raw materials, intermediary goods, and finished products. Along with this, sometimes oil is also used for the generation of electricity and heat for manufacturing.
Try actually reading before trying to analyze.

>>16902156
in my country wind produces like x5 the solar production, not entirely sure why that is, but it just is

>>16904742
I did read the article. That's how I figured out it was AI. Read the next fucking sentence together with that one.

>To generate the world’s current solar electricity output, which is approximately 87 TWh/day, it takes around 17 million barrels of oil per day. Given the world’s daily oil production of around 85 million barrels, it would take roughly three years to manufacture enough solar panels to match current global solar electricity generation.
This is nonsense. First of all, your reading would have 20% of all oil produced go to keeping solar energy running. Second of all, these two sentences have nothing to do with each other. Third of all, the 2nd sentence is gibberish. Instead of just saying how much oil it takes to make a panel, the article says how much oil it would take to make EVERY panel given as an oil per day x year calculation.

Fuck off with your AI bullshit.

>>16904748
https://www.lmc.edu.pe/are-solar-panels-made-from-petroleum/
I accept your concession, you can't prove your claim of zero oil consumption in the solar panel industry, you can only kvetch about AI since that is the trendy thing to do.

>>16904318
>At best complementary to nuclear,
Nuclear has forced constant output, solar is highly variable.
It's the worst pairing possible.
Ironically enough solar integrates the best with fossil fuel implants.

>>16904716
The key word is cartel, not oil, dumbass.
The less you consume fossil fuels, the more you gain transactional power over the companies that sell them.
You buy solar panels once every 25 years, the amount of oil involved is ridiculously low compared to a lifetime of consumption using only gas/fuel boilers/power plants.
But, hey, feel free to chain yourself to a lifelong of sucking oil cocks while you get buttfucked by rollercoaster prices. It's your cuck life after all.

File: Untitled.png (676 KB)

676 KB PNG

>>16904753
>I accept your concession, you can't prove your claim of zero oil consumption in the solar panel industry
I never made that claim. Oil is used in every industry if only because every industry involves transportation at some level and oil gets turned into car fuel (all the more reason for electric vehicles to be more of a thing).

Doesn't make you any less of a fuckwit for using an AI article with unsourced data to make a point.

By the way, that article is also AI, you absolute fucking clown. Here's another gem from the same "author"

>>16904756
>Nuclear has forced constant output
No. It doesn't.

>>16904769
>The key word is cartel, not oil, dumbass.
No, the key word was dependence and the solar industry is still dependent on the oil cartels because the oil cartels could still sell oil independently of the solar industry, but solar panel manufacturers couldn't produce and distribute solar panels without oil and the only possible solution you seem to have is just for the solar panel industry to implode itself in order to spite the oil industry.

>>16904775
>but solar panel manufacturers couldn't produce and distribute solar panels without oil
No? Oil isn't a precursor material for solar panels. The use of oil to produce solar panels is via energy production. If you replace the energy production with solar, you can produce solar panels without oil.

The current state of affairs is not some sort of material law of reality. It's just a snapshot in time of a supply line. It is completely feasible to phase oil out of the solar production pipeline. This is like arguing you can't produce gasoline without lead a few decades ago.

>>16904778
>Oil isn't a precursor material for solar panels.
Except that it is, you need oil at every step in the mining, production and transportation, solar industry was largely founded by oil companies to make oil use more efficient and productive, not to eliminate oil.

>If you replace the energy production with solar, you can produce solar panels without oil.
No, you can't that isn't how entropy works or someone would already be doing it and making massive profit and you couldn't have had solar panels in the first place without oil either and you can't even maintain solar panels without relying on petroleum products.

>>16904775
>reading comprehension failure
>cherry picks argument because brain can't cope
>reply doesn't make any sense
retard

>>16904787
oil comes from organic matter that grew thanks to the sun
oil is dependent on the sun
you can't produce oil without sun
the sun is king
sun reigns supreme

>>16904788
No, the cherry picking retard is the one bragging about their own illiteracy and ignorance of solar panel manufacturing while claiming that solar panel manufacturing doesn't depend on copious amounts of oil just because oil is not a direct precursor in solar panel materials.

>>16904795
Ok, if you are willing to wait millions of years for enough solar power that was used to generate an the amount of oil it takes to make a solar panel, you might be able to make solar panels with solar energy alone, but until then you will need the previously banked energy in oil.

>>16904796
>n-no y-you!
>>16904799
Your oil is nothing compared to the almighty power of the Sun god.

>>16904787
>Except that it is, you need oil at every step
>mining
EV
>production
electric furnace
>transportation
EV

Oh, hey, no oil. Like maybe there's some lube involved at some point, but almost all oil can be cut out of the system and the remainder isn't of much consequence.

>>16904799
>Ok, if you are willing to wait millions of years for enough solar power that was used to generate an the amount of oil it takes to make a solar panel
So this is the power of AI

>>16904817
>EV
Doesn't generate enough torque to mine and it would require more energy to sustain than you could ever generate with the mined materials.

>electric furnace
Doesn't generate enough heat to smelt and it would require more energy than you could ever generate with the heat produced.

Oil only works to meet all of the demands on demand because it took millions of years to get banked in an easily contained power source.

>>16904811
>Your oil is nothing compared to the almighty power of the Sun god.
Oil represents the storage of millions of years of sun energy which is why it is so much more potent than on demand solar energy.

>>16903303
I think it's both, plus the fact it'll become prime real estate in a few decades after the ice melts

>>16903926
>How
Two fires started in the same neighborhood not far from where I live due to solar panels a few years apart.
https://altomfuresoe.dk/ildebrand-paa-laanshoej-det-startede-i-solcelleanlaeg/
https://www.sn.dk/art520064/furesoe-kommune/112/solpanel-broed-i-brand-i-kirke-vaerloese/

>>16904817
Remind us, which solar panel company is mining all of its material with EVs and smelting all its material in electric furnaces that aren't run on fossil fuels themselves or even doing a majority of that with evs and electric energy? Imaginary Fantasy Solar Inc?

>>16904870
None. Remind us, why is it impossible to do? Sun goblins will attack if we steal too much of their precious sunlight?

You're arguing that we have to use oil, not that we are using oil.

>>16904837
>Doesn't generate enough heat to smelt and it would require more energy than you could ever generate with the heat produced.
lol what the fuck are you talking about, electric arc furnaces are literally the industry standard for melting metals, and have been for decades

File: mining footprint.png (676.1 KB)

676.1 KB PNG

>>16903733
The words you are looking for are emotional incontinence. He's not exhibiting an inflated ego, but he is exhibiting an inflated id. Learn the difference.

>>16904841
One angry burst of the Sun god would bring you and your fragile civilization to despair.
The Sun god decides when you wake up and when you sleep.
The Sun god decides if and what you eat and drink.
The Sun god decides what you wear and when.
The Sun god shapes every second of your life.
No amount of false oily prophet can change that.
You are bound to the will of the Sun god.
Forever.

>>16904771
Bro, third party here, you are looking really weak in this, just letting you know.

>>16904924
Not that guy but engaging with a troll tends to do that, guy is spamming AI articles as gotchas. If you bother replying to that you will automatically look like a clown

>>16904931
What do you mean? The guy who is trying to spam and call the article AI is the one that looks weak to me. He's even pretending to be a dismissive smug schizo with the whole Sun god act. It's a little whiny and pathetic to me, as an outsider to the convo.

>>16904932
Yes if you reply to a guy that spams AI articles you will look like a fool. A retard will always be a retard but actually engaging with a retard makes you worse in some way, at least retard was born like that.

>>16904892
That graph would almost be believable if it didn't have onshore wind > offshore wind.

>>16904938
It's largely irrelevant too. You need roughly 200 tons of oil to make a GWh of electricity. That's 200 tons of material permanently destroyed and it's not like oil or gas drilling doesn't involve the other problems of "mining" either . Mining 60 tons of rocks to make a GWh of energy with a windmill doesn't destroy the rocks nor destroy the materials. Aluminum and steel and what not are still all there when the thing breaks down and can be reused.
For the purposes of electricity generation all of those numbers in the graph represent functionally the same number, that is to say very negligible impact from mining. The difference between 10 tons of mining and 60 tons of mining is more or less academic when looking at an environmental impact. In practice the total amount of mining required to support any of the energy production methods pictured is order or two of magnitude less than fossil fuels and a tiny fraction of total mining even if the whole world was powered with nuclear, solar and wind.

Fossil fuel shills like to throw the idea around as a gotcha "well wind mills still use some oil to lubricate the gearboxes" or "well you still need to mine materials to build a solar panel" like that means anything. Which is not only just missleading but sort of hilarious to imply that wind is bad because it uses a tiny bit of lubricant -> we should just burn zillion tons of oil instead. Solar panel or wind turbine will always save in fossil fuel use compared and the total resource use is always vastly lower.

>>16904947
You sound like a bot. Oil wasn't mentioned try your prompt again

>>16904938
>That graph would almost be believable if it didn't have onshore wind > offshore wind.
Like the entire difference is concrete. Presumably because offshore windmills float and therefore don't require a fuckhuge concrete foundation.

>>16904932
>He's even pretending to be a dismissive smug schizo with the whole Sun god act.
Multiple people were replying to the AI spammer. I'm not the one that did the sun god bit.

I'm just
>>16904771
>>16904748
>>16904734
>>16904817
>>16904877

>>16902156
solar/wind + batteries is the future, as long as the PV panels and the batteries stay cheap enough (or become more efficient, or easier to produce..).

>>16902196
anon... do you know how efficient nuclear reactors are? they boil water to move a fucking turbine. and if there was a way to extract 100% of the energy from directly nuclear reactions, the same tech would be used to get energy from the sun and we wouldn't need nuclear reactors at all.

>>16904860
either badly done cabling or (most likely) bad inverters. there have been a few cases of known bad inverters

>>16903696
>>16903758
you can buy cheap batteries today, retards. go check on aliexpress.

>>16902156
Instead of solar energy we need to make the energy the sun makes, i.e., nuclear stellar PP chain fusion on Earth. That's true clean energy

>>16904877
>Remind us, why is it impossible to do?
Human industry is already developed past the point for there to be enough of the sun's usable energy available for the on demand needs of humanity as a whole especially when the resources needed are densely packed in small cross sections that definitely don't get enough solar energy to allow for the physical work that needs powered by the solar energy.

>You're arguing that we have to use oil, not that we are using oil.
We are using oil because we have to use oil to meet the energy demands necessary for the industry we have built.

Its only possible if you want something more harmful than all the austerity measures ever put into place where you cut off a large portion of the human population from energy just to eliminate fossil fuels.

>>16904884
>electric arc furnaces are literally the industry standard for melting metals
They aren't getting their energy just from the sun, though, they are burning fossil fuels, I tried to clarify that with my question
>>16904870
>melting all its material in electric furnaces that aren't run on fossil fuels themselves

>>16904771
>I never made that claim.
someone did
>>16902357

>>16904934
No, you definitely look intellectually weak because you can't actually refute any of the AI output about how the solar industry depends on the oil industry and you just have to ad hominem about AI and try to shift the topic of discussion to AI BAD instead of solar's inherent dependence on fossil fuels because you know you can't actually argue that the solar industry isn't inherently dependent on oil, but you can make a bunch of strong emotional appeals about AI.

>>16906005
fossil fuels will eliminate themselves, they're a limited resource
even more so at the rate we wastefully consume them
by denying the objective need to use alternative energy sources you're only kicking the can further and make it more difficult for solving inevitable energy production issues in the future

>>16906094
>by denying the objective need to use alternative energy sources
I have done no such thing, I have just pointed out that alternative energy sources like solar and wind are just ways to extend the life of fossil fuels because they are entirely dependent on the oil industry until we can generate fusion power or embrace nuclear energy.

>>16906007
1. Not me
2. Not that claim

>>16906005
>We are using oil because we have to use oil to meet the energy demands necessary for the industry we have built.

>We are using whale oil because we have to use whale oil
Shut the fuck up, dumbass.