@graf @Shadowman311 >me when my batterys work at 100%, 100% of the time
Its called nuclear and its calling...
Its called nuclear and its calling...
@dcc @Shadowman311 the power we sell to the US is all generated by nuclear and hydro. I think there's like 1-2 coal plants in Canada still in use and I can tell you exactly two times in Ontario I've ever seen wind used and one of them is a token black person of wind generation right when you go into downtown toronto that I don't think I've ever seen spin
@graf @dcc @Shadowman311 "green energy" is a jobs program for libtards, whose actual job is to scold people on social media. It's exactly the same as what most of American public education is.
The "economy" (pbui) is extremely fake.
The "economy" (pbui) is extremely fake.
oh great idea, we'll just store all the power in those gigawatt-hour battery arrays that we definitely have and which are definitely very environmentally friendly, safe, and reliable, such genius "added context" I bet reddit is very proud
I did the math on batteries once. For a 1GW power plant, would need hundreds of thousands of tonnes of lithium ion batteries for a 24h backup. Since lithium ion is a pain to get the minerals for, if we were to go with more common lead acid batteries, you're potentially getting into millions of tonnes of batteries for a single plant.
Some people then go "Oh, that's fine we'll build them once and then we're done", but that's not how batteries work. They have a limited life, and will have to be replaced, so we're talking about replacing millions of tonnes of batteries every couple decades. "Oh, that's a lot, but what's the big deal? We'll do that and then our green energy journey is over!" Nope! That's one power plant. New York State alone would require 41 of these plants.
The way these people talk is insane. Absolutely insane. It's true that batteries store energy, but the amount of energy we'd be talking about storing would need geological levels of batteries. To replace all electricity production with things like wind or solar, you'd need to create so many lead acid batteries that you'd probably use up every ounce of known elemental lead on Earth.
That's where stuff like nuclear and hydroelectric wherever it's remotely possible are basically mandatory because they don't have a marginal carbon emission per kilowatt and they run 24/7.
So yeah, shadowman isn't the only one who has something to say about it.
Some people then go "Oh, that's fine we'll build them once and then we're done", but that's not how batteries work. They have a limited life, and will have to be replaced, so we're talking about replacing millions of tonnes of batteries every couple decades. "Oh, that's a lot, but what's the big deal? We'll do that and then our green energy journey is over!" Nope! That's one power plant. New York State alone would require 41 of these plants.
The way these people talk is insane. Absolutely insane. It's true that batteries store energy, but the amount of energy we'd be talking about storing would need geological levels of batteries. To replace all electricity production with things like wind or solar, you'd need to create so many lead acid batteries that you'd probably use up every ounce of known elemental lead on Earth.
That's where stuff like nuclear and hydroelectric wherever it's remotely possible are basically mandatory because they don't have a marginal carbon emission per kilowatt and they run 24/7.
So yeah, shadowman isn't the only one who has something to say about it.
- replies
- 0
- announces
- 0
- likes
- 0
@graf @Shadowman311 I didn't realize we'd made an epoch-shifting advance in battery technology, why wasn't this on the news?