Maybe it's just good footage. Photovoltaics are synergetic with fossil fuel power, both in terms of green washing and actually prolonging dependence.
Can you please elaborate?
No, because they're shitposting at best and trolling at worst. See their other comments.
I can tell you right now whatever alternative solution they have, no one will accept.
Because photovoltaic and wind power are inherently unreliable, they create a need for fossil fuel power sources to always be ready to go in order to fill in the gaps. Fossil fuel companies like to talk about how they're all for a green transition, but what they don't say is that they want the transition to last forever.
This is brain dead, we have plenty of green energy storage methods available. We just need a big enough green energy surplus to store.
The benevolent fossil fuel industry will be there to help with every step of this revolutionary transition to renewable energy.
You know what, you're right, we're all fucked, there is nothing we can do, let's gather round and jerk ourselves off about how miserable we all are until the warm embrace of the ocean washes over our heads. Thanks for helping me finally see that.
What's with the histrionics? Nuclear power is a mature technology that's practically a drop in replacement for fossil fuel power. No need to redesign the grid to make it smart and add problematic battery storage.
I wasnt going to comment but
Nuclear is practically a drop in replacement for fossil fuel
got me real good, keep up the good trolling.
PV prolongs dependence on fossil fuels
That's an unusual take.
There are good applications for PV, but it is not reliable thermal power, so it will never sufficiently dispace fossil fuels. We need nuclear, concentrated solar, and/or deep-well geothermal power plants in order to accomplish that.
babies first electric resistive heater prototype would like to disagree with you.
I think they might be taking issue primarily with the "reliability", the argument that solar is all well and good, but because generation isn't uniform, it can't fully replace fossil fuels. And I can see the argument for using nuclear for base-load and supplement with solar as it's available to use.
i know what they're saying, but they're objectively wrong. Sure it's hard, it's not the most trivial thing to do. Harder than engineering, designing, and building a CCG turbine plant from the ground up? Highly doubt it, probably more expensive though.
Nuclear base load is an incredibly good strategy though, although nuclear isn't fossil fuels, so.
Maybe it's just good footage. Photovoltaics are synergetic with fossil fuel power, both in terms of green washing and actually prolonging dependence.
Can you please elaborate?
No, because they're shitposting at best and trolling at worst. See their other comments.
I can tell you right now whatever alternative solution they have, no one will accept.
Because photovoltaic and wind power are inherently unreliable, they create a need for fossil fuel power sources to always be ready to go in order to fill in the gaps. Fossil fuel companies like to talk about how they're all for a green transition, but what they don't say is that they want the transition to last forever.
This is brain dead, we have plenty of green energy storage methods available. We just need a big enough green energy surplus to store.
The benevolent fossil fuel industry will be there to help with every step of this revolutionary transition to renewable energy.
You know what, you're right, we're all fucked, there is nothing we can do, let's gather round and jerk ourselves off about how miserable we all are until the warm embrace of the ocean washes over our heads. Thanks for helping me finally see that.
What's with the histrionics? Nuclear power is a mature technology that's practically a drop in replacement for fossil fuel power. No need to redesign the grid to make it smart and add problematic battery storage.
I wasnt going to comment but
got me real good, keep up the good trolling.
That's an unusual take.
There are good applications for PV, but it is not reliable thermal power, so it will never sufficiently dispace fossil fuels. We need nuclear, concentrated solar, and/or deep-well geothermal power plants in order to accomplish that.
babies first electric resistive heater prototype would like to disagree with you.
I think they might be taking issue primarily with the "reliability", the argument that solar is all well and good, but because generation isn't uniform, it can't fully replace fossil fuels. And I can see the argument for using nuclear for base-load and supplement with solar as it's available to use.
i know what they're saying, but they're objectively wrong. Sure it's hard, it's not the most trivial thing to do. Harder than engineering, designing, and building a CCG turbine plant from the ground up? Highly doubt it, probably more expensive though.
Nuclear base load is an incredibly good strategy though, although nuclear isn't fossil fuels, so.