Hey smelly bum retards. Did you know solar is the future of humanity?
Let's go over it. Solar is clean, and it comes from the fricken sun. That's FREE~ energy for life.
Let's look at nuclear >smelly >old technology >unstable >unsafe >one small earthquake can cause a meltdown >radiation from microwaves causes autism
If your politician isn't supporting GREEN energy, and shunning shit ideas like nuclear, you need to start writing letters. Ask them about where the nuclear waste goes. Trust me, there is no nuclear waste solution.
>Did you know solar is the future of humanity? then why is everyone asking for government handouts for it
Adam Roberts
fun fact, coal plants release more radiation into the environment than nuclear plants
Adrian Young
>smelly
All plants do is spew out steam
>old technology
Wrong
>unstable
Wrong
>unsafe
Wrong nowadays
>one small earthquake can cause a meltdown
No it can't
>radiation from microwaves causes autism
I guess you're proof.
Solar energy is extremely inefficient at producing energy, with our growing population the demand more more output of electricity becomes apparent.
Mason Turner
what would be the ecological impact of collection of materials and construction of solar cells on a worldwide scale? Employing a combination of power generating methods is the best way to ensure that no one way becomes harmful.
Levi Thomas
Isn't solar technology absurdly inefficient?
Chase Sanchez
Solar is nuclear
Austin Wood
The sun is nuclear fusion not fission, my southern cousin.
Mason Kelly
there are better ways than solar, it's kind of a meme, I think it's outperformed by parabolic reflector + stirling engine, but probably not in cost so long as governments are subsidizing the shit out of solar cells
Connor Smith
Best post.
Eli Cruz
The energy density is too low you fricking bogan. Also, We don't all live next to a giant desert. Hydroelectric is where it's at. Don't have water? Tough shit.
Carson Sanders
As I said here a combination is probably best. hydroelectric turbines for people in areas with waterfalls & ocean currents, solar panels to supplement power needs on rooftops or be gathered en mass in sun bleached and wind turbines in open areas
Charles Lee
Electric fag here Solar is very inefficient and is no where near up to the task of maintaining the voltage on the grid. People always think of this in terms of b-but...i can power x amount of homes with green power x,y, or z.... It doesn't matter, its all about maintaining a high enough level on the national grid so that everyone gets the power they need. Power plants basically all dump power into the grid and we all 'share' it. To make solar even close to feasable on a grand scale we'd need huge collectors in space and we're nowhere near that.
Nuclear produces a lot of power but has obvious drawbacks. If the Jew would just release the hidden technology we know they have all would be good, but they make too much money on continuing this silly power debate.
Cooper Barnes
>nowhere for waste to go
We have an entire mountain built to house nuclear waste in Arizona until the end of time.
All nuclear waste. For centuries of use.
But it got shut down by the gov even though its basically built and finished.
New nuclear tech doesnt produce much waste either. It can be recycled.
Solar is nuclear. Except we cut out the middle man with nuclear.
James Russell
Picture of Japans nuclear reactor exploding.
Zachary Rogers
The French have been using a (nearly) closed loop nuclear fuel cycle quite effectively for decades now. Google "PUREX"
Caleb Rivera
>FAKKA YOU DOLPHIN AND WHALE!
Benjamin White
>nearly and what to dot hey do with that excess? We use ours to make depleted uranium bullets to sell to the Americans.
Sebastian Harris
They make nukes to drop on isolated pacific atolls for the sole purpose of rustling jimmies worldwide. Something like 80% of the electricity generated in France is from nuclear.
Dylan Brooks
> Solar is clean Not.
> it comes from the fricken sun You mine rare earths for panels on the sun?
> FREE All natural resources are free. The question is how much does it cost to gather them and to distribute them to customers. Processing and delivery.
Solar gathering equipment costs dearly and is very toxic to manufacture. Per kwh produced it`s worse, than chernobyl (not worse than GE`s fukushima tho).
Currently all rare earths are mined only in China, because China has no policy to treat Thorium as nuclear waste. So they just dump radioactivity into ocean. Every 1m2 of solar is 17 liters of liquid radioactivity poured to nemo`s aquarium.
> energy for life Only if you live around equator.
Jordan Young
Plus, spent fuel rods can be recycled and reused until depleated and investing in nuclear will make us more likely to discover cheap fusion and fission.
Joshua Stewart
No nuclear reactor in the world between now and the year 40,001 will ever "explode"
David Reed
Why do you hate nucular energy user?
Kevin Collins
>radiation from microwaves What?
Logan Allen
SOLAR FRICKIN ROADWAYS
David Gray
It`s waste, because you don't build reactors to burn it.
LFTR could burn it enough, so only fraction of 1% would be left and only for 3-4 hundreds of years, instead of millenias.
Most of "nuclear waste" outside of the mountain is thorium, which is again - perfect fuel for the reactor.
They show on discovery-channel some finn mountain "with warnings to future generations about invisible horrible radiation". But future generations would look on these retards and laugh their asses off. Because they are literally burrying the best and the safest fuel on earth and spending enormous amount of resources and energy to do it.
Kayden Ross
> fusion and fission scam
Nathan Foster
No one has ever extracted communist burning plutonium from a solar panel so why bother with the hippie crap.
Henry Green
there a radioactive reactors that use waste products of other reactors and cant explode. Solar isnt everything in the future its not even a major thing in the future outside of maybe space travel crap.
Matthew Nelson
> solid fuel > cant be burned more, than 2% in best case inefficient long-run scenarios > effectively
listen to the most prominent nuclear scientist on the planet
Juan Allen
Better than just about everyone else. Just sayin'
Ian Russell
>the future of humanity What if I told you that the future of humanity involves dismantling stars for raw materials? Guess what you use to turn star material into energy on demand.
Alexander Carter
If we were able to capture ALL of the sun's radiations for one hour, we'd have enough energy to power the whole world for 1 year (or some shit like that)
But hey, we're still highly inefficient in exploiting solar energy, so that will not work out in the next few years anyways
David Ortiz
>dude weed: the post
Parker Sanders
> anything liquid [other than ITER scam, which is again technically plasma - not liquid]
Juan Morris
Until Solar becomes feasible, Nuclear is the energy of now.
Andrew Clark
The solution to nuclear waste is dirty bombs over the middle east.
Ryder Wilson
Then get to work building that dyson sphere France.
Dylan Clark
I don't understand. ITER is fusion. PUREX dissolves used solid fuel and uses liquid-liquid extraction to separate useable fissionable isotopes.
Eli King
>NUCLEAR fusion Wew lad
Luis Wright
The output of the sun over one millionth of a second could supply the electrical needs of the entire world for multiple years. Orders of magnitude and such. The sun is rather large.
Daniel Adams
Are you suggesting that nuclei don't fuse in the sun?
Logan Perry
The sun(Sol) is a nuclear reaction though Saying Solar is better then Nuclear on any level is objectively wrong in the long term view of things
Grayson Wood
Or use breeder reactors to produce plutonium and use the plutonium in a thorium reactor
If done right (close circuit water supply) there's no pollution and Thorium reactors have no risk of critical melt downs
John Howard
Why do people think melt down= nuclear detonation? The core just gets too hot and melts is housing, even the worst melt down in history didn't detonate, it just lit up the entire reactor
Elijah Perry
No I'm suggesting that nuclear fusion is still a form of nuclear energy
Carter Bell
Solar energy IS nuclear energy, you retard.
Hunter Barnes
Dr. semantics is in
Chase Lewis
Fusion power.
Solar is a cute meme at best.
>Oh no it's over cast today! >Oh no it snowed! >Oh no dirt/bird poop
Etc.
Nuclear leads to fusion.
Robert Walker
ITER is scam. PUREX burns solid fuel.
Jeremiah Harris
>Let's go over it. Solar is clean, and it comes from the fricken sun. That's FREE~ energy for life. >That's FREE Show me that field where solar panels rains from the sky or is it some special plant?
Michael Gomez
Nuclear power btfo solar in every aspect you emucunt
Jordan Mitchell
But fusion isn't viable, even our most efficient designs take more energy than they produce
Plus liquid helium isn't that easy to come by
Liam Thompson
>If the Jew would just release the hidden technology we know they have all would be good... (pic)
Kayden Miller
Nuclear is completely viable and has very few drawbacks. France was like 75% nuclear until they started shutting it down. Revolt has come a long way and we've solved ask of the grievances people have. The problem is that we are still using 50 year old designs because of regulations. The jew doesn't want nuclear because it would free us from oil and then they couldn't keep selling carbon credits.
Landon Kelly
Fast reactors can burn a much higher percentage of the fuel, greatly reducing waste. Not only was that mountain shut down, but they cemented shut the entrance.
John Murphy
>France was like 75% nuclear until they started shutting it down.
They havent. They still are 75% nuclear.
Julian Murphy
Yes, we just have to make wise decisions with it... Like not building nuclear plants in coastal regions with major active fault lines.
Dylan Cooper
You know damn well you explosive flying cunt.
Landon Torres
This faggot doesn't know about nuclear fusion
When this technology becomes mainstream your ridiculously inefficient wind/solar will become redundant.
Christopher Moore
Fusion fuel is essentially water and rocks, which is of abundance
Anthony Mitchell
...
Levi King
Every square acre of North America could be covered with solar panels and it would barely provide only half of the electricity needs of the US alone. And that is assuming all of North America is as sunny as Florida (which it isn't). The numbers are out there feel free to do the math yourself.
Ian Edwards
My nuclear physics professor is of the opinion:
"definitely solar, maybe nuclear, current nuclear technology definitely problematic"
It's weird to then go on lereddit and everyone is going, "muh nuklear reactoors". Some kind of propaganda probably.
I think the energy giants would vastly prefer nuclear energy because then it's still a natural monopoly that they control. With solar the grid become decentralised. You can in theory have self sustaining neighbourhoods or even self sustaining houses.
If you have a farm, you can already be self sustaining with solar and a diesel/natural gas backup. Lots of preppers on youtube have already done it.
John Butler
>Every square acre of North America could be covered with solar panels and it would barely provide only half of the electricity needs of the US alone.
That is just plain false. Why do say stuff like that, lol?
Tyler Young
Deuterium yeah, but not tritium or helium-3. Deuterium doesn't work alone, you need a heavier isotope with it to help. Also you're forgetting the electricity needed for the magnets and the liquid helium to cool them
Fun fact, it takes a fuck ton of electricity to condense helium
Brayden Russell
Yea, and you pay for the monstrous grid and electricity storage costs for your "decentralised" grid yourself. Deal?
William Powell
Well seeing how it will never but sunny all across the US yeah I'd say there's some reasoning behind it
Plus mountains will block a good number of them for most of the day
And we don't have batteries strong enough to store the energy we do manage to produce
Jaxson Long
What ? We're still at 75% nuclear. The biggest issue is the age of plants
Colton Morris
Yes. People already do it. Batteries aren't THAT expensive, even today.
Jaxon Cruz
>And we don't have batteries strong enough to store the energy we do manage to produce
A completely mundane 18650 based battery pack that will get you through overcast days and nights is already viable. Please already do it today. As complete amateurs.
Tesla is already selling professional better engineered packages.
If you want to go off grid today with solar, you can, and it's not even expensive.
Jack Taylor
The numbers are out there, you can do the math yourself, it isn't hard. I would do it for you but I'm on my phone. Someday I'm going to have to make a copy pasta that explains it all.
Logan Russell
The batteries have nothing to do with it. Solar panels can't produce enough wattage to keep up with demand.
Sebastian Gomez
>all this obsession with lithium batteries instead of just plain old pumped water thanks musk shills
Ethan Myers
You lie and make shit up. What is your deal, bud?
Do you just hope that people will just see your post and be like, "oh he agrees with me and he says "the numbers are out there", I'm not going to bother checking anything".
Charles Gutierrez
Going off the grid yeah solar is viable, but this is an argument of weather or not you could power the entire US off solar
Ethan Brown
Yes, a single family dwelling can viably go off grid in many parts of the country. It isn't as cheap as you claim. When I looked into it several years ago it would have cost me about $17,000 for all the equipment, with no telling when any of it would need replaced.
Do you have any idea how much more electricity cities and factories consume? Where is all of the real estate supposed to come from for these solar panels? I've done the math, clearly you haven't.
Jack Martin
Seriously, there are plenty of ways of storing energy and turning it back into electricity
This one company uses electricity when there's a surplus on the grid to pump water into an elevated reservoir and runs it through a hydroelectric system when the grid needs more energy, a bunch of others are using near frictionless flywheels to store it as momentum and back into electricity
Adam Morales
Why don't you like her, user?
James Cox
You must be a South Australian on holidays, not sure how you're online otherwise.
Nuclear is clearly superior for base load requirements, alongside hydroelectric. Solar and wind are complementary but not sufficient enough to handle the entire grids load.
Eli Stewart
So you are unwilling to educate yourself. Gooder for you.
Connor Perez
the law of conservation of energy makes this method inherently wasteful. Besides, you'll never have a surplus because you'll be using it as fast as you bring it in.
Blake Wright
Gooder? What the hell?
Jordan Garcia
Summer energy generation capacity (2014): 1068 Gigawatts
(10680000 mega watts/ 850 mega watts) * (27 square kilometres) = area needed assuming no other power generation capabilities = 339247 square kilometers = 83 million acres
Residential developed land in urban and rural united states: 139 million acres
The math checks out in my favour by a lot. You have to consider not even close to 100% of the energy generation would be from solar. If one replaces coal and natural gas that is only 60%.
You have to consider that American solar power technology is about 5 years ahead, from that of the Chinese and that continuous improvements are always being made. Just today a Japanese university announced a huge 10% increase in intensity.
Jaxson Smith
>several years ago
Well that is your problem. Get with the time. It's way cheaper today than it was even in 2014.
Brody Young
no shit, but batteries are somewhat inefficient storage as well you're meant to use it so that 500 megawatts can service a region that uses that much, ON AVERAGE, but uses smaller or larger amounts at predictable times
Wyatt Martin
>you'll never have a surplus What happens to the grid at night? Oh that's right power stations discharge the excess electricity because if they didn't it would overload
That's a pretty huge surplus of electricity that we're just throwing away
Hunter Cook
Currently used nuclear technology is obviously shit and the only reason pressurised water reactors using Uranium fuel rods was to gather plutonium for nuclear weapons. Apparently, the guy who did most to create this form of nuclear energy generation preferred Thorium nuclear energy generation but it was never adopted, mainly because it doesn't create plutonium as a bi-product.
But... Solar will not replace coal/gas/nuclear for the foreseeable future. Solar doesn't work very well at night or when there is heavy cloud cover, if you didn't realise? Battery technology is not good enough in the context of a national power grid. Batteries also depend on limited resources of rare Earth metals. So, unless or until room temperature super-conductivity is commonly available, sorry mate... Solar will never hack it. To be fair though, a lot more could be done to make solar affordable for use by more people for home use to reduce the demand for electricity off the power grid. Reduce does not equal replace.
Brandon Barnes
I don't think there would ever be excess power from solar to store in the first place. The grid (here in the us) isn't just your locality, if you're not using much power in one area, its getting used in another. power plants maintain a certain level grid wide and adjust their output accordingly. Solar/storage is good on a small/local scale but is woefully underpowered to supply an industrialized nation.
Logan Long
that's thousands if not millions of years away.
like half of the population are below 70 iq sub-humans, we have a long way to go. and in the future everyone will be asian called muhammad if nothing changes.
Connor Foster
Its not that simple, besides, power plants adjust output electricity is not like water, you can't think of it in quantities you can store or count.
Eli Harris
Not sure where you are getting the US consumption numbers (which you need). In the Wikipedia article you posted is lists total consumption at roughly 4,150 TERRAWATTS annually (4.15 petawatts or 4,150,000 gigawatts).
Nathan Parker
I wasn't talking about solar, I was talking about conventional power plants that don't need to have enough peak output to supply the peak demand
Jacob Green
xD
Liam Hill
Even if they were twice as good (which they arn't) $8,500 still isn't what I would call cheap or easily affordable.
Alexander Howard
You would need to fill the entire sahara with solar panels just to power the aluminium industry. There isn't that much room for improvement either, since there's only a set amount of energy in sunlight. It's fine to put on roofs in cities and such but large fields of solar panels are retarded.
Jace Rogers
Solar is unreliable and old tech. Plus, it's killing birds.
John Diaz
ok gotcha...but plants don't always operate at max output, and other plants make of the difference in power between regions and demand Its not just your local plant that operates at a set amount all the time.
