hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 64 of 82 FirstFirst ... 14546162636465666774 ... LastLast
Results 1,261 to 1,280 of 1625

Thread: God Hates THE WORLD (Natural Disaster Thread)

  1. #1261

    Join Date
    May 31, 2011
    Posts
    4,525
    Quote Originally Posted by elmicker View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hel OWeen View Post
    See, and being able to admit that distinguishes me from you.

    That much is evident.
    Oh, don't worry, I'm entirely able to admit when I don't know what I'm talking about. You just don't see that very often because if I'm sitting there thinking "hrm I really don't think I know what I'm talking about here...", do you know what I do? Don't post.

    To wit

    Quote Originally Posted by Hel OWeen View Post
    - It's the most expensive way of generating electricity
    This is wrong. Nuclear is cheaper than coal, gas, biomass, most forms of wind [until very recently] and is cheaper than solar at almost all latitudes. Additionally what the typical LCOE measure does not account for is the land efficiency of nuclear power. You could fuel most nations on a dozen large reactor sites. Fuelling most nations on solar or wind would require the use of areas of significant areas of the land and sea.
    It's "cheaper" in the neoliberal sense of "cheaper" aka "privatize profits, socialize losses". Here's a hint: leaving costs out of the equotation that the tax payer is up for makes lots of things damn cheap. As for a concrete example: Companies are supposed to provision money for decommissioning old plants as well as for safely storing nuclear waste. Now, what happened at the start of 2019? All companies paid a measly 23 billion EUR into a newly created governmental fund. That got them rid off any further payments. Dismantling the plants + safe storage for 1 million(!) years will be finanzed by the German tax payer. Considering that at this time the actual provisions already amounted to 38 billion (so they've got a reduction of 15 bil, which made their stocks raise) and the estimated costs to 47.8 billion, that's a sum left out when calculating cost for kW/h per energy source. And that's just one example of lots of hidden costs (aka "tax payer handles it") of nuclear power.

    Some sources:
    https://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/artic...sere-AKWs.html
    This one states a study from McKinsey, that on average (in the world) the costs for decommisioning a nuclear plant are 750 million EUR.

    https://www.wiwo.de/unternehmen/ener...3017890-2.html
    That one states (Arthur D. Little) that in Germany, considering all costs, overall nuclear power created an economic loss of 54 billion EUR.


    - It relys on a finite resource
    This is just patent fucking nonsense.
    Alright, please enlighten me.

    - It produces very toxic waste of which we're still having no decent way to handle it
    Likewise, patent fucking nonsense. We have plenty of ways of handling it. What they are is expensive and unpalatable. Waste disposal is, technically, one of the least problematic areas. This is a political rather than economic or technical challenge - the very definition of NIMBY.
    So we do have ways, but we don't have ways? Gotcha ...

    There are lots of problems in the world in dire need of a solution for which mankind has easy and non-problematic solutions. Only that in practice mankind always gets in its way itself.

    - And most importantly: the current level of renewable energy technology does already allow us to replace all fossil fuel based energy production without any loss in availability, amount of energy available etc.
    No, it does not. Re-check your numbers.
    You need to redirect your inquiry to institues like Stanford University or Deutsches Institut zur Wirtschaftsförderung, which calculated them. Not me. I leave that to the experts, ya know.

  2. #1262

    Join Date
    May 31, 2011
    Posts
    4,525
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hel OWeen View Post
    See the link I provided in my answer to Razor.

    These days renewables are cheaper and as reliable as any other form of energy generation, but less dangerous. "Sun" is finite in the sense that it will supernova some day. Roger that. Guven that Earth has long ceased to exist then, that's infinite enough for me.*)

    As for 4) don't underestimate the power of lobby groups.

    *) See, Climate change is a global issue, but your "sun and wind is finite" aims at countries without sun/wind/water respectively. And that is certsainly true. But climate change can't be solved on a country-wide level. It must be tackled on a worldwide level. And that's where synergies come into play, trasnporting the energy from where it's (currently) produced to where it's needed. Just like it's already done with traditional energy generation.
    the problem right now is not viable sites or production cost Hel, it's scaling world production up enough to make a dent in the demand for energy.
    I'm very well aware of that. But the same is true for the proposed alternative: nuclear power. It takes literally decades to build a nuclear power plant. And from what I gathered, the biggest problem isn't even scaling up the production. The real propblem is the worldwide redistribution of the generated energy. Solar-generated power from Africa to "sunless" Scandinavia and water-generated power from Scandinavia to desert Africa etc.

  3. #1263
    Lief Siddhe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 15, 2011
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    6,716
    Quote Originally Posted by RazoR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    sun and wind are not infinite in the sense that there are often days and days without sun and wind. what do you want, factories to close down until it shines? rivers and lakes can dry out after a good earthquake or volcano eruption, not all countries have a sea to use seafarms, and covering large parts of territory with solar panels also fucks up the biosphere in the area because the sun is no longer being absorbed by the ground etc etc

    there IS a reason people have tried to tame animals and then moved on to other sources of power just so we dont depend on good weather and healthy animals to survive/progress, is all im saying.

    in the end scenario, renewables only might be what humans have to settle for to survive, but in that case we can forget leaving this planet ever, and using computers whenever you want and all the benefits of 21st century, it's basically going back somewhere into the first half of 20th century energy wise for the common man (if we even manage to survive until then)
    i'd take that over regressing all the way back to the late bronze age to be honest. because, if we keep shitting CO2 into the atmosphere with wild abbandon, that's where we're going to end up.
    How?
    funny thing is, you're gonna be quite well off, razor. global warming is insanely good for countries such as russia, canada and scandinavia - give it a couple degrees up and all of a sudden siberia becomes the worlds biggest farmland.

    what gets unthawed from all that ancient ice might be a completely different can of worms tho, i hope we're adaptable to bacteria and viruses from a couple hundred thousand/million years ago
    I was somewhere around Old Man Star, on the edge of Essence, when drugs began to take hold.

  4. #1264
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    13,149
    Quote Originally Posted by RazoR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    sun and wind are not infinite in the sense that there are often days and days without sun and wind. what do you want, factories to close down until it shines? rivers and lakes can dry out after a good earthquake or volcano eruption, not all countries have a sea to use seafarms, and covering large parts of territory with solar panels also fucks up the biosphere in the area because the sun is no longer being absorbed by the ground etc etc

    there IS a reason people have tried to tame animals and then moved on to other sources of power just so we dont depend on good weather and healthy animals to survive/progress, is all im saying.

    in the end scenario, renewables only might be what humans have to settle for to survive, but in that case we can forget leaving this planet ever, and using computers whenever you want and all the benefits of 21st century, it's basically going back somewhere into the first half of 20th century energy wise for the common man (if we even manage to survive until then)
    i'd take that over regressing all the way back to the late bronze age to be honest. because, if we keep shitting CO2 into the atmosphere with wild abbandon, that's where we're going to end up.
    How?
    same way nuclear war can propel us back to that stage, are you not thinking trough the implications of significant drought and food shortages here ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hel OWeen View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hel OWeen View Post
    See the link I provided in my answer to Razor.

    These days renewables are cheaper and as reliable as any other form of energy generation, but less dangerous. "Sun" is finite in the sense that it will supernova some day. Roger that. Guven that Earth has long ceased to exist then, that's infinite enough for me.*)

    As for 4) don't underestimate the power of lobby groups.

    *) See, Climate change is a global issue, but your "sun and wind is finite" aims at countries without sun/wind/water respectively. And that is certsainly true. But climate change can't be solved on a country-wide level. It must be tackled on a worldwide level. And that's where synergies come into play, trasnporting the energy from where it's (currently) produced to where it's needed. Just like it's already done with traditional energy generation.
    the problem right now is not viable sites or production cost Hel, it's scaling world production up enough to make a dent in the demand for energy.
    I'm very well aware of that. But the same is true for the proposed alternative: nuclear power. It takes literally decades to build a nuclear power plant. And from what I gathered, the biggest problem isn't even scaling up the production. The real propblem is the worldwide redistribution of the generated energy. Solar-generated power from Africa to "sunless" Scandinavia and water-generated power from Scandinavia to desert Africa etc.
    there is only very limited distribution problems like those you describe, a wind turbine in-country will not perform as well as one out at sea in a near permanently windy region like the north sea or kattegat, but it will function just fine, it will just generate less. chasing perfect spots is a bit of a red herring in this regard, the real goal should be broadly distributed generation capacity so that local conditions cannot cripple overall generation capacity, ie if the wind turbines in Denmark sit still, it's fine because we're getting power off those from the Dutch coast along with excess hydro from Norway.

    distributing power over long distances has significant loss associated with it, it's unavoidable but can be counteracted by installing more generation capacity to make up for said loss, having said that the need to move power from Africa to Scandinavia or the other way is very much limited in the first place.

    of course doing so requires even more production capacity, and guess what we don't have enough of.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  5. #1265
    Movember 2012 Stoffl's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    The original viennese waffle
    Posts
    22,670
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RazoR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    sun and wind are not infinite in the sense that there are often days and days without sun and wind. what do you want, factories to close down until it shines? rivers and lakes can dry out after a good earthquake or volcano eruption, not all countries have a sea to use seafarms, and covering large parts of territory with solar panels also fucks up the biosphere in the area because the sun is no longer being absorbed by the ground etc etc

    there IS a reason people have tried to tame animals and then moved on to other sources of power just so we dont depend on good weather and healthy animals to survive/progress, is all im saying.

    in the end scenario, renewables only might be what humans have to settle for to survive, but in that case we can forget leaving this planet ever, and using computers whenever you want and all the benefits of 21st century, it's basically going back somewhere into the first half of 20th century energy wise for the common man (if we even manage to survive until then)
    i'd take that over regressing all the way back to the late bronze age to be honest. because, if we keep shitting CO2 into the atmosphere with wild abbandon, that's where we're going to end up.
    How?
    funny thing is, you're gonna be quite well off, razor. global warming is insanely good for countries such as russia, canada and scandinavia - give it a couple degrees up and all of a sudden siberia becomes the worlds biggest farmland.

    what gets unthawed from all that ancient ice might be a completely different can of worms tho, i hope we're adaptable to bacteria and viruses from a couple hundred thousand/million years ago
    Enjoy all that anthrax

  6. #1266

    Join Date
    May 31, 2011
    Posts
    4,525
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RazoR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    sun and wind are not infinite in the sense that there are often days and days without sun and wind. what do you want, factories to close down until it shines? rivers and lakes can dry out after a good earthquake or volcano eruption, not all countries have a sea to use seafarms, and covering large parts of territory with solar panels also fucks up the biosphere in the area because the sun is no longer being absorbed by the ground etc etc

    there IS a reason people have tried to tame animals and then moved on to other sources of power just so we dont depend on good weather and healthy animals to survive/progress, is all im saying.

    in the end scenario, renewables only might be what humans have to settle for to survive, but in that case we can forget leaving this planet ever, and using computers whenever you want and all the benefits of 21st century, it's basically going back somewhere into the first half of 20th century energy wise for the common man (if we even manage to survive until then)
    i'd take that over regressing all the way back to the late bronze age to be honest. because, if we keep shitting CO2 into the atmosphere with wild abbandon, that's where we're going to end up.
    How?
    same way nuclear war can propel us back to that stage, are you not thinking trough the implications of significant drought and food shortages here ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hel OWeen View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Hel OWeen View Post
    See the link I provided in my answer to Razor.

    These days renewables are cheaper and as reliable as any other form of energy generation, but less dangerous. "Sun" is finite in the sense that it will supernova some day. Roger that. Guven that Earth has long ceased to exist then, that's infinite enough for me.*)

    As for 4) don't underestimate the power of lobby groups.

    *) See, Climate change is a global issue, but your "sun and wind is finite" aims at countries without sun/wind/water respectively. And that is certsainly true. But climate change can't be solved on a country-wide level. It must be tackled on a worldwide level. And that's where synergies come into play, trasnporting the energy from where it's (currently) produced to where it's needed. Just like it's already done with traditional energy generation.
    the problem right now is not viable sites or production cost Hel, it's scaling world production up enough to make a dent in the demand for energy.
    I'm very well aware of that. But the same is true for the proposed alternative: nuclear power. It takes literally decades to build a nuclear power plant. And from what I gathered, the biggest problem isn't even scaling up the production. The real propblem is the worldwide redistribution of the generated energy. Solar-generated power from Africa to "sunless" Scandinavia and water-generated power from Scandinavia to desert Africa etc.
    distributing power over long distances has significant loss associated with it, it's unavoidable but can be counteracted by installing more generation capacity to make up for said loss, having said that the need to move power from Africa to Scandinavia or the other way is very much limited in the first place.
    I didn't meant my example literally. Just to illustrate that the reasoning against renewables that "site <x> has no <y>" is a non-issue. We already do distribute energy across regions and countries in Europe to mitigate against power shortages or to simply sell exess capacity. This needs to be enhanced and done on a global scale. Where energy from Scandinavia doesn't end up in Africa, but e.g. in northern Germany (if neede). And energy from there in Belgium, if needed. And from Belgium in southern France etc. That's what I meant to illustrated.

  7. #1267
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    18,533
    Distributing surplus energy is a bridge to cross when it becomes a problem. Currently the problem is shitting millions of tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere and impending biosphere collapse.

    The excess energy problem could be solved with existing tech, it's a bit of a non issue in the grand scheme of things.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  8. #1268
    Venec's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Europe's Mexico - Poland
    Posts
    6,014
    We're just having our first storm (with hail). In march.

    Nice.

  9. #1269
    Lief Siddhe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 15, 2011
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    6,716
    yes, but not for large parts of russia & co. northern countries basically get an improved climate if the temperature goes up, turning former arctic climates toward moderate.
    I was somewhere around Old Man Star, on the edge of Essence, when drugs began to take hold.

  10. #1270
    Djan Seriy Anaplian's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    4,386
    Shit then people might actually want to visit Russia.

    I’m convinced. We must act now.

  11. #1271
    Movember 2011Movember 2012 Nordstern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    10,119
    Quote Originally Posted by Djan Seriy Anaplian View Post
    Shit then people might actually want to visit Russia.

    I’m convinced. We must act now.
    China is way ahead of you. Over the past few decades, they've been moving over a million people into resource-rich areas.
    "Holy shit, I ask you to stop being autistic and you debate what autistic is." - spasm
    Quote Originally Posted by Larkonis Trassler View Post
    WTF I hate white people now...

  12. #1272
    Dorvil Barranis's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 18, 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    5,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Stoffl View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RazoR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    sun and wind are not infinite in the sense that there are often days and days without sun and wind. what do you want, factories to close down until it shines? rivers and lakes can dry out after a good earthquake or volcano eruption, not all countries have a sea to use seafarms, and covering large parts of territory with solar panels also fucks up the biosphere in the area because the sun is no longer being absorbed by the ground etc etc

    there IS a reason people have tried to tame animals and then moved on to other sources of power just so we dont depend on good weather and healthy animals to survive/progress, is all im saying.

    in the end scenario, renewables only might be what humans have to settle for to survive, but in that case we can forget leaving this planet ever, and using computers whenever you want and all the benefits of 21st century, it's basically going back somewhere into the first half of 20th century energy wise for the common man (if we even manage to survive until then)
    i'd take that over regressing all the way back to the late bronze age to be honest. because, if we keep shitting CO2 into the atmosphere with wild abbandon, that's where we're going to end up.
    How?
    funny thing is, you're gonna be quite well off, razor. global warming is insanely good for countries such as russia, canada and scandinavia - give it a couple degrees up and all of a sudden siberia becomes the worlds biggest farmland.

    what gets unthawed from all that ancient ice might be a completely different can of worms tho, i hope we're adaptable to bacteria and viruses from a couple hundred thousand/million years ago
    Enjoy all that anthrax
    Kaiju frozen under the arctic.
    "Those who are skilled in combat do not become angered, those who are skilled at winning do not become afraid. Thus the wise win before they fight, while the ignorant fight to win." - Zhuge Liang


  13. #1273
    Duckslayer's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 23, 2017
    Posts
    1,629
    The idea that anywhere will somehow come out benefitting much from climate change when 90% of the worlds population will be underwater is odd imo.

  14. #1274
    Donor erichkknaar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    12,666
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Distributing surplus energy is a bridge to cross when it becomes a problem. Currently the problem is shitting millions of tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere and impending biosphere collapse.

    The excess energy problem could be solved with existing tech, it's a bit of a non issue in the grand scheme of things.
    It's already a problem. Where is the worlds biggest wind farm? The Gobi Desert. Where are the large cities that want the power it produces? China's coast.

    Consequentially, it's massively underutilized. Why did they put it there? That's where the wind is, apparently.
    meh

  15. #1275
    Caldrion Dosto's Avatar
    Join Date
    November 19, 2011
    Posts
    2,396
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    yes, but not for large parts of russia & co. northern countries basically get an improved climate if the temperature goes up, turning former arctic climates toward moderate.
    This is only true to an extent.

    If the northern polar cap keeps melting and releasing fresh water into the sea the Gulf stream will grind to a halt. And that will turn of the heat in northern scandinavia (paradoxically i know).

  16. #1276
    Lief Siddhe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 15, 2011
    Location
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Posts
    6,716
    i'm not saying climate change will be a doublegood thing for russia, i might have miscommunicated that. what i wanted to say is not all parts of the world will be hit the same way. the equatorial and coastal parts are absolutely fucked, but the further inland you go in cold countries, some of these changes will actually improve the area in a way.
    I was somewhere around Old Man Star, on the edge of Essence, when drugs began to take hold.

  17. #1277
    Venec's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Europe's Mexico - Poland
    Posts
    6,014
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    i'm not saying climate change will be a doublegood thing for russia, i might have miscommunicated that. what i wanted to say is not all parts of the world will be hit the same way. the equatorial and coastal parts are absolutely fucked, but the further inland you go in cold countries, some of these changes will actually improve the area in a way.
    Global weather patterns will be more and more fucked so you can't really say anything for certain. They might get warmer, but they might also be subject to harsher winters and unpredictable temperature shifts.

  18. #1278

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    1,375
    Quote Originally Posted by Venec View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lief Siddhe View Post
    i'm not saying climate change will be a doublegood thing for russia, i might have miscommunicated that. what i wanted to say is not all parts of the world will be hit the same way. the equatorial and coastal parts are absolutely fucked, but the further inland you go in cold countries, some of these changes will actually improve the area in a way.
    Global weather patterns will be more and more fucked so you can't really say anything for certain. They might get warmer, but they might also be subject to harsher winters and unpredictable temperature shifts.
    And they might stop getting rain, or get so much of it that their drainage systems/rivers can't cope.

  19. #1279
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    13,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Hel OWeen View Post
    I didn't meant my example literally. Just to illustrate that the reasoning against renewables that "site <x> has no <y>" is a non-issue. We already do distribute energy across regions and countries in Europe to mitigate against power shortages or to simply sell exess capacity. This needs to be enhanced and done on a global scale. Where energy from Scandinavia doesn't end up in Africa, but e.g. in northern Germany (if neede). And energy from there in Belgium, if needed. And from Belgium in southern France etc. That's what I meant to illustrated.
    you're litterately waffling about a solved problem that is being addressed right now, you know that right ?

    as far as i know, every European country is adding more interlinks as coal gets decommissioned.

    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Distributing surplus energy is a bridge to cross when it becomes a problem. Currently the problem is shitting millions of tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere and impending biosphere collapse.

    The excess energy problem could be solved with existing tech, it's a bit of a non issue in the grand scheme of things.
    It's already a problem. Where is the worlds biggest wind farm? The Gobi Desert. Where are the large cities that want the power it produces? China's coast.

    Consequentially, it's massively underutilized. Why did they put it there? That's where the wind is, apparently.
    they did build a couple of "ghost cities" along the edge of that desert that it's supposed to supply, they haven't filled up yet though.

    it's very much a case of building the infrastructure before shuffling the people into the cities though.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  20. #1280
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    18,533
    I wish they did that here. 20,000 shit houses have been built near my parent's but they've only put in an extra 2 schools and cancelled plans for a new hospital while closing wards on the current hospital. Apparently infrastructure is a waste of money.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •