Renewable Energies

What does Sup Forums think about Green Renewable Energies?

I think It's the future

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=2zD0m_ci-oo
youtube.com/watch?v=G8zOHZINyG8
independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/smugglers-tried-to-sell-nuclear-material-to-isis-a6684051.html
news.mit.edu/2016/new-solar-cell-more-efficient-costs-less-its-counterparts-0829
sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160418095918.htm
iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/bioluminscent-trees-could-light-our-streets/
seeker.com/solar-cells-made-from-trees-dissolve-in-water-1767363664.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

I think they're already here

Too expensive, not dispatchable, has an unsolved storage problem, will require massive (trillions) upgrades to the electrical grid to handle the 'dirty' power it makes.

Does nothing for transportation energy needs.

The future will be with the LFTR even if it takes China leading the way to prove that to the world.

Learn about the economics of the electrical grid:
youtube.com/watch?v=2zD0m_ci-oo

Learn about the solution for our liquid fuel needs:
youtube.com/watch?v=G8zOHZINyG8

We will add about One Cubic Mile of Oil use as an abstraction of energy use in the next 50 years. Pic related is how you can meet that demand.

Renewables energies can't break even on manufacturing energy requirements and those that can are either highly toxic to produce or can't supply stable baseload.

Only sensible option is nuclear, either breeder fission or fusion if it comes around.

Renewables also look gay as fuck.

>leave solar cell facing sun
>receive electricity
It's pretty great, even at the shit efficiency levels we get today.

I worked in solar and it is extremely inefficient and expensive.

>renewable resouces
Nice meme.
Once that sunshine is absorbed into anything, (solar panels, plant leaves, your skin) it's gone for good.

It's great so long as the faggots stop trying to pave roads with it.

It's all a lie to distract you from nuclear, which is an existential threat: any of that waste could be used to turn your city into an uninhabitable wasteland, all it takes is a payment to the most amoral cunt at the station, a payment they never actually intend to pay.

Solar is a lie, it costs as much energy to create the damn things.

...

They may be the future after we exhaust nuclear.

I think that green energy is the future, but not renewable. Renewable hasn't been proven to be efficient enough, and most only work in a certain climate. I believe that thorium nuclear energy is the future. Nuclear is the most efficient energy that we have, as well as the safest, with no carbon emissions from energy production.

Yep he's just going to slip some into his pocket and sneak it out.

>This is how he thinks nuclear waste oversight works in a first world country

Yeah nuclear isn't that dangerous. You sound like my eighth grade science teacher, who wouldn't teach us the benefits of nuclear energy

>any of that waste could be used to turn your city into an uninhabitable wasteland,
Jokes on you, I'm already in Detroit

It's a fucking meme, we can not sustain our populations with green energy or resources at our current population or in the near futures exponentially larger population.
Clean water farms for instance, use industrial devices. Which need non-renewable resources.
The amount of water we currently use will mean electric-dams will be useless within a few years.
Solar panels will have to be much more efficient to be worthwhile and even then. In a country the size of Murica (or your own country) we would need endless acres to sustain (in small European countries, solar panels actually might be worthwhile).
Wind works, but it's not very efficient either.

Regardless, it's postponing the eventual end.
Not even postponing it very long either.
I'd say without really thinking, a safe assessment would be fewer than 100 years are being obtained before eventual societal downfall.
Drop the world population and maybe Green energy could be worthwhile.

[Audible Kek]

I don't care how it's done, it's already been done within the past few years in Russia. Thankfully it was quickly discovered and covered up, but not until some ISIS cunt bragged about it here.

Nuclear would solve every energy problem ever, thorium can be mined anywhere and creating a demand for plutonium is good for nuclear proliferation, better in reactors than in bombs. But people are shitty and selfish and greedy and dumb, oh God they're dumb, they'll just pretend they're going to pay you millions because they expect you to be dead before they get around to paying, or that you'll be so guilty due to being complicit in the murder of millions of people that you'll just kill yourself.

Nuclear is scary as fuck.

If people can bribe generals for kilos of heroin I can pretend to bribe some nihilistic nuclear engineer who only just realised women don't fuck engineers no matter how much money they make.

You're dumb if you think this isn't exactly how the world will end. My hope is that nuclear is already being employed but it's a closely guarded secret that we're actually already relying on nuclear, that way you'll never know who to bribe, you won't even know you could bribe someone.

Again, nuclear will solve the world's energy requirements, after that vertical farms will solve hunger, solving poverty isn't difficult after the food issue and equality is just a matter of education after that. But if cities start growing mushroom clouds when they start adopting nuclear, then it's all going to stop there. The people will slowly become more luddite and that's the end of this civilisation.

It all ends if we mishandle nuclear. Definitely don't not use it, just realise it's so easy to domestically manufacture a nuclear bomb if you have a reactor close by.

Pfffft god damn you are stupid as hell. Imagine being so assblasted you sit there writing paragraphs, and yet all that writing contains is a bunch of non-factual, opinion driven crying. Feel free to support anything you said with citations next time around.

So you actually believe people aren't so corruptible they can be bribed into committing atrocities?

independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/smugglers-tried-to-sell-nuclear-material-to-isis-a6684051.html

Wasn't even hard. There was actually another one from Russia, but of course no sources because Russia responsible! If this happens every two or three years, it's only going to take one slip up and suddenly the leading terrorist badass group can nuke a central business district of any major city. Maybe you don't care, in your shitty country American town, but some of us have decent white collar jobs.

>I think It's the future

It's here for a while and so far it works fine. It's a nice addition to conventional energy. In a world with a growing demand for energy it's a quick and effective way to meet this demand.

Renewable Energy would work well with microgrids. Unfortunately it'll never happen in the US.

1. Mine the Silicon

>If people can bribe generals for kilos of heroin I can pretend to bribe some nihilistic nuclear engineer who only just realised women don't fuck engineers no matter how much money they make.
This is the difference between leaf shitposting and aussie shitposting

Melt in in electric ovens (huge energy consumption)

3. Cut that crystal into slices and then treat it with Chemicals and UV light and Vaporize copper on to it, huge energy consumption. Alone the clean rooms that can only have one particle per 10m2 consume huge amounts of energy to keep the air filters, lights etc on also really dirty chemical process

A lot of it doesn't produce enough electricity to sustain modern electricity requirements
If we want to use green renewable energies which we should, we also need to reduce the demand for electricity by becoming less dependent on it

4. Now lets make the batteries to store that energy during the night, lets mine some Lithium and nickel, really really dirty and TOXIC

5. Lets process the Lithium to batteries, more Giagantic amount of energy used to truck and ship the lithium to the plant, then more giant amount of energy to process it to batteries

Solar efficiency is getting better. Hopefully we can generate more from renewable resources; it's also be nice to have some on your property in case of a problem with infrastructure if your one of those paranoid nuts.

news.mit.edu/2016/new-solar-cell-more-efficient-costs-less-its-counterparts-0829

I'm not sure how much more efficient the mechanical aspects of ind or water can get, but I'm very interested in what we can do with the advancement of Solar. Nuclear has some risks, but it's nice to keep in the back if we ever use up all the fossil fuel.

On mass scale more likely not with how the world works in regards to economics.

Should you invest in a solar system if you own a place? Of course. I own a small 5k solar system that I've used for the past 5 seasons now and it's helped out a lot during some power outage.

Since I'm rural with a high water table, I NEED my pumps running during the rainy season or I have a flooded basement.

Solar is worth the investment depending on your needs. Most of your here now tho, it wouldn't benefit.

Thats how silicon is made btw

The energy used to produce Solar panels, fuel for trucks, electricity for the ovens that melt that shit, the ovens to make the crystals, the plants to produce the wafers, the chemical process to make solar panels out of the wafers, the mining for lithium, nickel, copper, the production of the batteries...all that energy WILL NOT be produced even if you run those solar panels for 10.000 years 24/7.

HOW THE FUCK is that renewable?
HOW THE FUCK is that Green?

The energy used just so you can produce a little bit of energy for your self is not worth it from an environmental perspective. It gives you more independence but it is NOT green and it is not renewable.

Bio fuel is. Hydro is. Clean coal is, Fracking is. But seriously this is just a scam.

>Clean coal is, Fracking is
Ya blew it, Gina.

There's nothing renewable about solar panels. The rare earth minerals and the damage caused by mining them is insane, and that's not even getting into the carbon footprint that goes into making them. Then you have to dump thousands of gallons of chemicals into the ground for every solar panel farm. The power grid can't even handle the inconsistency that comes with solar power, it's either they're not generating enough power when it's needed or they're generating too much power which causes the power company to operate at a loss. There are times when power companies have to pay other companies to accept excess power.

They're completely unworkable and it's Germany is moving back to coal. They can't have nuclear though, it's just too efficient and clean for leftist do-gooders.

orbital mirror arrays to produce massive steam power

In order to produce solar panels and batteries from renewable sources you would need:

1. Mining of silicon to go full electric.
2. Container Ships to go full electric.
3. The production of silicon full electric.
4. The production facility from Silicon to Wafers full electric.
5. Mining of Lithium, copper, nickel etc full electric.
6. Shipping full electric.
7. Battery production full electric.

And then power all this with something that is emotion neutral. And EVEN THEN will you NEVER produce as much as energy with those solar panels that you have used to produce them.


Its BS, its fraud.

we should use BBC power

we get black guys with huge black cocks to fuck white girls and then the white girls orgasm with the force of a thousand suns and we harvest that energy from their orgasm

Fracking is the future. Thats just a fact.

There will be still plenty of gas left on the ocean grounds to power the next species that is evolving into humanoids long after we are gone.

it's still useful to invest in alternative energies because it will come in very handy when we colonise space.

the investment in solar for example will pay off. one thing we do need to do is abolish (((wind power))) which is just utterly retarded, ugly, and pointless

Environmentalist BTFO by facts.

Fracking is a shit tier extraction method, to get an ineffective fuel source. Nuclear is the real future.

Solar is shite, though. Wind is also pretty meh, but at least it's cleaner. Calling ugly is the laziest argument, too.

my nigga elon bout to make solar 10000% better

just watch

solar isn't shit you stupid cunt it's cheaper than wind power in australia and incredibly useful for a whole range of things.

wind is not environmentally destructive and literally aesthetic vandalism. it should be abolished as well as its supporters, who should be gassed and tortured

We should force fat people to get on those generator bicycles and generate electricity for us. My country could turn into the biggest exporter of energy within the century if we somehow made it work.

Anything wrong with my thinking?

is*

I don't need it to be efficient in creation; Right now we have the ability to use resources that are finite to research and produce something, in the future with the alleged scarcity of those resources finding options might be more difficult. I'm not interested in solar out of the goodness of my heart, but looking at a post oil/gas world where other options are required. Their duration and efficiency need to be increased; they only last about 20-30 years at the moment which is not great. While I'm not a scientist, I do have some hopes that minds better then mind can mitigate some problems with solar.

Jevons paradox, solar and wind will only ever supplement grids or fit niche applications. Modern world will be completely falling apart through the 21st century, serious oil and gas depletion problems are right around the corner. Fracking is a sign terminal depletion is here. There is nothing even close to a replacement for fossil fuel on the horizon.

>cheaper than wind power
Is that meant to be a good argument? See Swissbro's points about the real cost of solar.
>and incredibly useful for a whole range of things.
You mean electricity is useful? 'Cause i already got that.
>wind is not environmentally destructive and literally aesthetic vandalism.
I take it that was a typo. But how is it even remotely as destructive as solar? Yes, they're ugly, but literally who cares? They tend not to be put in places where anyone cares, and even if they were, if people can get over modern architecture, they can cope with some big white windmills.

I kind of like Wind. And I really don't think its that ugly. I know its not good to the birds but at least they are efficient. I would say use wind but only where it makes sense. Wind in the middle of the ocean or in places where the wind never stops.

Also Nuclear is the only option to colonise mars. So you think we are using Nuclear Subs and Aircraft Carriers but we won't use Nuclear energy to colonise a hostile foreign planet?

Also if we really know how to terraform mars to be hospitable, why can't we Terraform earth to "fix it"? Maybe because the increasing heat is because of the sun? Just think about it, the US was covered in ice. Europe was covered in ice. The water levels have risen hundreds meters only in the last 20.000 years without ANY INDUSTRY.

How about biofuel (poo, to be specific). I mean, India has the fuel, all we need is the machine.

I think the wind turbines can look quite good in a landscape. Sure, if you live right next to them they may be a thorn in your side, but in the Netherlands they are usually placed next to highways or in the middle of nowhere.

shills everywhere

The production costs more energy than it will ever make.

Humanity will be extinct before we use half of all GAS that we have on the bottom on the oceans, Antarctica, Arctic etc.

Lets spend all that money into building better filters and ways to reuse the emissions. Lets use the money and resources to develop ways to purify the air, protect us from radiation and control the weather.

street-side collection sites funnel the poo into sewers where it flows downhill to a collection facility for processing.
They can shit in the street and save the world.

well for example solar can enable decentralised energy production and make it viable to live away from the grid. my mum lives on a large rural property with a solar + battery setup that works awesome, no grid. this is the future desu and only (((communists))) could be against it.

mate a wind farm can pollute 10,000 square kilometers + of visual fields. thats just one. if we powered everything with them it would ruin pretty much all of nature. cities are blight enough but they are at least relatively small compared to the wider landscape. a small wind farm is bigger than most medium sized towns.

nuclear is alright but i reckon we should just use gas, coal and solar in the future. develop nuclear for sure and work towards fusion but as a mass power solution its not needed

its sorta ironic though because aus has an abundant supply of all types of energy. massive coal reserves, natural gas, hydro power resources (in the north), abundant sun shine, abundant uranium, plutonium, thorium, and yet we have some of the highest power prices in the world. shows how dumb people here are to mismanage it so badly

You do when the carbon that goes into the atmosphere during manufacture is greater than the amount of carbon saved by using the solar panels over alternative forms of energy. By using solar panels we're actually harming the environment more than we would by using gas or nuclear, despite you still prefer using solar panels just because it makes you feel good.

Not all energy has to be stored in batteries.
Some recent facilities use solar to pump up water reservoirs, and then use hydroelectric to generate power when needed.

Also the technology is always changing, do you really think people aren't working on more environmentally friendly manufacturering processes?

You'll have to settle for piss.

sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160418095918.htm

Why not both?

>Also the technology is always changing

Yeah let's just keep pouring money into this environmentally destructive technology because gee maybe someday it'll get better. If we're willing to dump billions on shitty inefficient panels right now then where's the motivation for the industry to innovate?

CO2 is not bad. Its Carbon and twice as much OXIGEN, yeah that good stuff you tree huggers like. So why not spend the money to develop a cheap way to convert that CO2 into Carbon and Oxygen. That means that Fracking and Power plants of the future would produce TWICE the amount of Oxygen then Carbon and on top of that produce energy. Can we do that instead of fucking around with fucking solar panels?

>well for example solar can enable decentralised energy production and make it viable to live away from the grid.
As can wind. That's why i have both solar panels and wind turbines on my property.
>mate a wind farm can pollute 10,000 square kilometers
Literally how.
>i reckon we should just use gas, coal
I'll be (((you))) do, Gina.
>develop nuclear for sure and work towards fusion but as a mass power solution its not needed
It really is. Coal is every bit as bad as solar for toxicity. No such thing as "green coal."
>shows how dumb people here are to mismanage it so badly
Yea, it's the same with our telcos. We let monopolies ruin it for everyone. It's crazy how much more money you have left at the end of the month living in the states after paying electricity and phone bills. But their taxes (like our rates) are a bigger hit.

Batteries are the limiting factor for renewables. Solid state batteries that don't need a lot of energy used on themselves to stay at an optimal temperature need to enter the market.

You know, I heard Sweden had something where they harvested methane from shit. I'll see if I can find a source.

I'm imagining an oilfield surrounded by trees.

wind turbines are not fucking viable for 99% of small scale energy production applications u fucking retard

>Literally how.

because it can be seen from that amount of land

hurr durr gina durr durr durrrrrr. i dunno what u mean about toxicity but u are clearly a grade A retard. coal is cheap reliable power and its toxicitiy isnt nearly as bad as the shit u have to store for 10 million years from nuclear plants

also our power prices have nothing to do with monopolies u dumb cunt they have to do with renewables mandates that have destroyed the grid and forced out low cost generation while forcing power companies to buy utterly useless, environmentally and aesthetically destructive wind "power"

Once we figure out how to make it cheap and store excess energy on a national scale, then it can be the way forward.
Until then, we still need to depend on coal/oil/nuclear power.

>because it can be seen
I don't understand why this is a problem outside of national forests and other preserves. It's not as if they're painted hot pink and covered in strobe-lights, they're just big fans nigga.
My biggest problem with them is when you see a bank of them on a hillside and only one is turning, there's no point to having them if someone can't maintain them.

because we shouldnt ruin beautiful rural landscapes forever just so we can produce unreliable expensive power from wind turbines

if we have to have them, they should be put in cities, with the people who vote for them. literally put each one in a suburban backyard, they would fit. you could store millions of wind mills in cities and thats what we should do if we must have them

One, the oxygen molecule already has 2 oxygen atoms (hence why it's given the denotation O2). Secondly, we already have trees which may not do the job very quickly, but cheaply. Thirdly, and this is almost completely unrelated but I feel it will intrigue you, scientists are working on a way to create bio-luminescent trees, thus allowing for the replacement of street lamps.
iflscience.com/plants-and-animals/bioluminscent-trees-could-light-our-streets/

I want it bad for independence not being bound to a grid would be great. I wish liberals would shut up they are giving it a bad name.

I stopped arguing with the solar and wind freaks. trying to get them to see that both of them are at best supplements to a grid run by something stable like nuclear or gas is a waste of time.
Nuclear is the future and has been. But bad timing with a movie and an accident at three mile island put it on life support. Then the idiots at chernobyl pulled the plug. (At least in the USA I hear Europe did not go nuts).
I firmly believe that if those two issues did not happen we would be building true fusion reactors by now.
And since we are Sup Forums the jews probably did not want to remove fossil fuels because with almost unlimited energy they could not control us or something.

Solar generation is already cheap, but it has many unsolved problems associated with it. The fact that it only produces during the day, and fluctuates vastly between sunny and overcast days means you can't rely on it to power a country without a huge backup.
It's a shame that batteries suck ass.

>wind turbines are not fucking viable for 99% of small scale energy production applications
Disagree.
They aren't viable for city placement, i concur. But nuclear should be taking care of that anyway.
>because it can be seen from that amount of land
So? That isn't pollution. You can still farm around a turbine.
> i dunno what u mean about toxicity
Yea, i figured you weren't well read on the subject.
>coal is cheap reliable power
Indeed it is. But we've outgrown it.
>and its toxicitiy isnt nearly as bad as the shit u have to store for 10 million years from nuclear plants
Nah. A small amount of nuclear waste, which can still have other uses, is negligible compared to the waste coal causes in mining, transporting, and burning.
>also our power prices have nothing to do with monopolies
They literally do, you tourettes suffering child. Perhaps you're just too young to have been watching power bills, but we've always been gouged thanks to the lack of competition. Or do you think Foxtel and Telstra have nothing to do with pricing in their fields as well?
>while forcing power companies to buy utterly useless, environmentally and aesthetically destructive wind "power"
But not solar, even though it's included in that mandate, and far more prolific, right?

Your argument is moot because solar has gotten better, by orders of magnitude.

Its a technology, not a used fuel, that means something similar to moors law applies to it.

There are a few solar companies in the US, free market competition drives innovation, and people are happy to put them on their house because they increase your home equity by the price of the panels.
Solar is almost free for homeowners.
Right now you rent energy from the oil companies, when you could be owning your generation. Its the same thing has home ownership vs renting. Houses are actually pretty cheap compared to renting because the money you spend goes back to you as your home equity, unlike renting which goes to someone else's equity

it's usually harvested from pig shit, it was done here a few years ago but it turned unprofitable, I guess it lost dem subsidies.

The green part is mostty irrelevant, but the renewable part I'm all for.
Sadly such energy sources are unreliable and the technology isn't advanced enough for them to provide a large enough amount of energy.

>A small amount of nuclear waste, which can still have other uses
What uses could nuclear waste have?

Which one is more jewey pol?

>Regular power plants
Jews own the energy industry and charge you monthly forever and increase costs constantly whenever they want and there is nothing you can do

>install solar on house
Upfront cost is huge and the jews get your money but now you owe $0 to them long term if you setup is good enough. Should they house every be sold the cost will be rolled into the next persons purchase price which will inevitably be a mortgage so then the jews get 30 years of interest on the increase in home value.

>because we shouldnt ruin beautiful rural landscapes forever just so we can produce unreliable expensive power from wind turbines
A turbine can be taken down. Scarring from coal mines and other materials for making solar panels aint so easily remedied.
>you could store millions of wind mills in cities and thats what we should do if we must have them
Agreed.

Depleted uranium has a variety of military applications.
But if we ignore those, then there's still no shortage of deserts in the world for us to bury it in, if shooting it into space still isn't viable.

Graphene will push us a few hundred years into the future.

1. Coal and Gas plants will produce TWICE the mount of Oxygen then they are producing Carbon. Carbon can be used to make carbon fibres.
We can use graphene to filter it.

2. Graphene based room temperature super conducting material. Imagine cables that can conduct electricity with virtually no loss of energy.
We can build Nuclear power plants in the desert and deliver the electricity over giant cables under ground. If you think thats mad just remember that we have giant cables connecting the US and Europe for fucking internet.

3. Graphene based Supercapacitors. Capacitors that can store giant amounts of energy, charge instantly and are not self discharging over time but can discharge instantly if needed. Will be the batteries of the future.

4. Graphene based electric motors (using superconducting incredibly strong graphene based electric magnets and Coils). The smaller an electric motors gets the faster it has to turn to produce the same amount of thrust. Because normal materials loose energy there is a limit to how viable it is, also its getting too hot etc Electric jet engines of the future will be very small thus enabling us to build flying "cars", electric jets, hypersonic electric jets etc

5. Graphene based Magnets can also realise a T-Shirt that is basically an MRI scanner, constantly taking screenshots of all your cells.

6. Graphene based memoriser (transistor+Memory) could be the base of pretty amazing AI.

etc etc etc

I wonder about the long term effects...

Massive wind farm build out, what happens with all that energy extracted from the climate system?

Same with solar, all that thermal energy removed from the system.

This shit won't have no effect, the whole Earth is a massively complex interconnected system and we're just fucking it all up with no understanding.


And before you say the siphoned off energy is so minuscule, that's exactly the same logic used to dump chemicals into the ocean... The ocean is so big and we're just dumping a little... Then everyone is doing it in more and more massive amounts and what do you know, we've literally poisoned the ocean with mercury and plastic and other industrial bullshit.

I think they should develop on their own and not have gorillions of my tax money flow into that shitty industry.

Is human based global climate change real then? most people here seem skeptical.
I highly doubt the human race will die off (naturally) before we use up all the fuel, with the exception being if the human race moves beyond fossil fuels before using them all up. While I don't believe the 'we have 50 years' thing; the belief in tens of thousands of years of reachable fuel beneath the Earth is also a bit unbelievable.

Also, while cruising the net I found an article on solar cells made from organic matter and you seem up on this; do you know anything about it?
seeker.com/solar-cells-made-from-trees-dissolve-in-water-1767363664.html

(captcha: select all gas stations)

>always been gouged

no, australia had literally the cheapest power in the world in the year 2000. not so long ago right mate? just before renewables mandates started to be implemented.

solar is expensive, no doubt. but at least it doesn't pollute huge areas of land like wind turbines do.

and no wind turbines are not fucking viable for 99% of individual rural properties, they are too fucking inefficient in terms of price per unit of power generated

i've never seen a coal mine, even though weve been digging out coal in aus for literally hundreds of years.

ive seen many wind farms, which destroy the very beautiful quality of this land of ours which is sparseness and naturalness, even though they dont produce more than a couple percent of our power needs and only started being built around a decade ago

if that doesnt give u some idea about the difference then i dunno what will

It won't be the future if idiots keep getting empowered.

Once new battery technology is available for storing reneweables it will be the future. Without new batteries it cant compete.

New battery tech is coming out in the next 5-10 years which will allow vast amounts of power to be stored safely after which we will either see houses producing and storing their own power with no need for a grid with each house being built with a massive battery.

Twice as much as Oxygen then Carbon by MOL MASS you uneducated smartass.

All of them are way, way worse than nuclear energy.
Solar panels are extremely toxic and inefficient.
Wind turbines are noise
Dams are hurting the rivers ecosystem

Massive wind farm build out, what happens with all that energy extracted from the climate system?

Same with solar, all that thermal energy removed from the system.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAGAHHAHAHAGAFGAGAHAHAHA!!!!!

>Depleted uranium has a variety of military applications.
Okay, that slightly explains it, but what kind of military applications; some kind of elaborate weapon that'll become the new agent orange? Nukes? Some new fangled poison bullet? I feel I'm out of the loop here.

>then there's still no shortage of deserts in the world for us to bury it in.
NO! We're trying to reduce the amount of deserts, dang it.

The thermal energy you prevent from reaching the earth via solar panels is ultimately degraded to heat too, so I don't think it makes much of a difference.

How is green energy not dispatchable or transportable? The whole point of most of it is that it can be used on local or near by. Like a community able to setup their own shit. Theres nothing in it right now that will produce enough energy to handle all our needs but its a great tool in the toolbox. Fuck the electric company.

Also every type of energy has the same storage problem. And Im hoping the military fixes it. They should have figured out by now how useful point laser defense would be. The only tech that has a hope of making nukes useless. And all airforces in the end.

The problem is they need a ton of energy to power those lasers. And ideally they want it mobil on ships and the like so they need a way to store a shitload of it and move it around.

Hoping the good old military industrial complex gets around to revolutionizing energy storage for us.

>you could store millions of wind mills in cities and thats what we should do if we must have them
Fine by me, I don't really see windmills as ugly myself and don't understand what's so terrible about seeing a few on a hill here or there in spots where they're actually of use. Seeing a ton of them in one spot with only one or two actually generating power is abysmal though, and I think we'd agree that going out of your way to put them up just because is retarded, there are spots where they're useful and places where they're absolutely not.

I think it's the way you worded it that made me think you didn't know what was going on.

>citation needed

Ultimately it is, but not in the same place as it was previously, which will affect climate patterns and such.

look at this shit..straight up environmental vandalism

>what kind of military applications
A replacement for tungsten. It's hard and dense and gets used in armor and shells for tanks and other heavy vehicles.