Muh green technology

SOLAR ROADWAYS!

the solar roadways was hilarious, just like Elon's solar roof shingles. its a meme that boomers and Delusionals love. It's pure hopium.

there are not that many nuclear powerplants but there were already multiple incidents of economical disasters at great scale because of this safe nuclear reactors.
solar, wind, water and earth magnetic field energy are the best solutions for everyday energy sources, coal/oil/natural gas as suplementary energy sources and nuclear as the one for energy sources of special purposes
making huge nuclear powerplant in middle of sahara could be nice solution though.

the problem with eco energy sources in most cases is that law is fucked because at least in my country they ty to fuck you over on energy you produce on your own and technology is still expensive and under developed because of still small market

Say it with me:
nuclear
power
is
the
future

yeah this guy covers a lot of those
youtube.com/user/Thunderf00t
it's always impressive how fucking absolutely retarded the average boomer and instagram retard can be
he even gets hate from the sjws for calling them out for the retards they are

>Green lifestyle
These fuckers are the same ones that buy pop vinyls and retarded collectors edition mickey mugs and caps. You mention to them the minimal lifestyle and living within your means and they all say the same "i could never give up my comfortable lifestyle for the good of the future, earth, and soul" fucking consumerists

Attached: Screenshot_20190513-011852_Firefox.jpg (1439x937, 878K)

>>
>the problem with eco energy sources in most cases is that law is fucked because at least in my country they ty to fuck you over on energy you produce on your own and technology is still expensive and under developed because of still small market
This desu
You should know though, this is because of regulatory capture at both the european and national level. Energy distribution companies don't care whether or not the energy on their lines is green or not, but they do care if there is energy on their lines... and you making your own energy (and worse, not giving it back to the grid) is not putting energy on their lines.

That's why you're getting fucked over.

Thundercuck covered about 4 different ones about 20 times each. He's made how many videos about SOLAR FRICKING ROADWAYS? I think he's put more effort into his videos than the scammers themselves. And not in a good way, because they're boring as fuck to watch.

He's so out of ideas that he made his own scam, which didn't get any idea, and then dismantled his own scam. That's the sad state of affairs of soyf00t. I guess he just didn't have much to do after he finished his Why do people laugh at creationists (part 237) series.

Also, he has a bad issue with pretending to understand some things which he doesn't (thankfully, he understands thermodynamics at least.... but that's a basic requriement to be a chemist).

>Yeah, butt is jus uan walmart so is fine
>implying it will always be that way
>implying it makes it right
just stop existing, holy shit
Clean energy can be possible if money got put into research BUT hey, it's not gonna MAKE money, it's only going to make the planet more stable to live in so why bother, amirite?
The end can't come soon enough.

Attached: 1539321807077.png (568x454, 367K)

>no amount of solar windows will change that.
proof?

Why did Germany close perfectly fine nuclear power plants that still had a decent amount of years to run and straight on replace them with coal powerplants?

Not an argument about making more fission nuclear, why did you close the existing ones

The solar shingles are significantly less retarded, they actually fucking work and might be economical for consumers in certain areas once they get the costs down a bit.

I think the biggest problem with solar shit is that they still rely on the grid in most cases. It'd be great if you could rely on them (along with a battery) as a backup when the power goes out. There are a lot of pretty well justified technical reasons why this hasn't happened yet, but that would be the killer app for solar.

>They dont understand how Sciences works
>coal is worse than Solar Energy xD

Imagine American education lmao

The govt want to go as clean as possible. Also because we have major Co2 emissions in big cities and want to convince people to use alternative methods of transportations but they ain't listening because
>muh hippie energy bad
Also, if someone started manufacting affordable electric cars here, they'd make big fucking money in no time but since the (((oil companies))) don't want to lose money, they still keep pushing propaganda that the current system works (for them) and that's why you shouldn't change it.
Also, too many brainlets allowed to live make it difficult to make any good changes.

what scam did he do

INF and PRISM breeder reactors are the only way.

solar is so fucking bad in many ways. it's even bad for the environment since it relies on huge batteries and they are fucking HORRIBLE for the environment.

like i even agree with a lot of climate change shit, but i never ever agree with the """solutions""", they are fucking dogshit. and we can't kneecap our own country's economy to placate this horseshit.
all while india and china and africa don't give a FUCK about the climate. and will continue to ramp up production and squash our economies.

>The govt want to go as clean as possible.
I've watched your government fumble and they either are staffed by 80 IQ mongrels or they're genuinely disinterested in doing anything but lip service.

Even the most recent battery factory investment by the entire EU is laughable compared to what private companies in the US are investing.

"If someone started manufacturing affordable electric cars here" Yeah, but sadly we're stuck with Volkswagen and Renault.

Also, you didn't ask my question. Closing nuclears to open coal plants is not "going as clean as possible" and doesn't solve the greater problem at hand. We can handle a little more nuclear waste until those fission plants get decomissioned; we can't handle continuing increase of CO2 emissions. So as I said, why does your government seem to only pay lip service to going green?

Also let's not even mention those marxists, Der Grüne.

youtube.com/watch?v=Zkcc2Rbyc9U
Watch this man BUST his own SCAM
In a 23 minute long video no less, with the pacing of a paraplegic with down syndrome.

50 Watts per square meter, I guess some buildings would power their lighting for free.

Best green technology is nuclear power. Change my mind.

Attached: 1557295494769.jpg (1024x1024, 489K)

>Harvesting the power of wind and the sun is bad
Solar energy is shit. The panels are extremely expensive and fragile, and they ALL must be cleaned about once a week. Wind power is fucking garbage and fans are extremely expensive. The large fans generate such a shock wave that they make nearby houses vibrate with every rotation.

Attached: 1533371154150.jpg (537x536, 123K)

>and we can't kneecap our own country's economy to placate this horseshit.
The funny thing is that your economy might very well undergo a revival. When was the last time a new american car company succeeded? When was the last time it was producing things in the United States instead of Mexico?

Also, I love how batteries always HORRIBLE for the environment but the worst you can come up with is some chemical leakage (which largely only happens in China, go fucking figure they're retarded) and terrain destruction (hmm, I wonder what fracking, which is increasing as a % of oil percentage, does... I also wonder if it's worth sacrificing our entire climate so that a few hundred km^2 look pretty)

>plants that create tons of radioactive waste that gets thrown out into the world

It's called a nuclear waste disposal site and it wouldn't be a problem if you hippies didn't have a problem with inconspicuously tunneling under a useless and tectonically stable desert or mountain. But no, since you niggers block every single potential method of safe containment for even waste that ALREADY exists, you'd rather leave them at deactivated nuclear power plants scattered throughout the countryside and suburbs, where they're sealed in a few layers of lead and concrete and protected by a few mall cops. Because that's safer and more "green".

>low-middle class lifestyle will NEVER be sustainable

>no goy you can't live like they did in the 50s, do you know how unsustainable that is?

>oh right me and Mr.Goldberg bought our 5th jet and bunker/farmland in New Zealand. But the goy can't have that, it's unsustainable! Time to drive home in my Lamborghini, and eat steak that isn't formed out of bug protein! So glad the goy live sustainably.

Every sentences Here is wrong wow.
How about you start Reading real books and Not partout bullshit from Jow Forums?

Why don't you watch a single video of a solar power plant and realize everything he said is true?

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 192K)

Listen up you sanctimonious Kraut! We like coal in North America, and my American ally is correct in that, all things considered, the implementation of mass-scale solar energy projects WILL ultimately prove to be more environmentally devestating than allowing for the continuance of existing frameworks like coal. Solar SUCKS!

Based user

Modern reactors create way less waste, and get way more energy out of the fuel they use. It would be possible, if people like you would just let it happen instead of working against it, to build reactors where there would be almost no waste and the little waste that it would create would stop being radioactive after a few years. That would of course also mean that even more energy would be gained from the same amount of fuel.
Breeder reactors are a step in the right direction.

Using Solar panels to go off grid is based

>solar and wind shit is horrible for the environment
Rundown?

Coal is contaminated with uranium and thorium, which are released when burned, exposing more of the population to even more radiation in one year than from nuclear power plants over even decades of operation of the latter.

epa.gov/radiation/tenorm-coal-combustion-residuals

Irradiated thorium becomes uranium-232 and can be subsequently enriched into uranium-233. Not to mention it's heaps more expensive to make a sustainable fission reaction with thorium. You're better off just using current fission reactors as they are and strive for fusion.

manufacturing them costs energy. manufacturing chemicals cost energy. make energy creates pollution. why manufacture something and create pollution that isn't going to end in a netloss of pollution? that's stupid.
no electric car has been a netloss of pollution.

What's hilarious is that hippies will even protest fusion despite the fact that it's going to use literally just hydrogen isotopes and produce effectively zero waste because it's just nonradioactive helium-4 particles.

And no matter how much the west cucks our own standard of living, china and india are just gonna keep developing and polluting regardless of how much whining the climate people do.

CO2 is food. Plants are near starvation as we speak. We need to watch real pollution, but in no way shape or form, should we limit CO2 emissions. It's a bonus really.

Attached: second-to-largest-cut.jpg (550x412, 43K)

> Closing nuclears to open coal plants is not "going as clean as possible"
Coals create less lasting waste.
>We can handle a little more nuclear waste
But if we can avoid it, why not?
>why does your government seem to only pay lip service to going green?
80/20, senpai. 80% of what the govt and the politicians say is pure garbage to gain votes. 20% are burst of sanity.
I don't even agree with what 95% of the politicians stand for but once they go with something good, you better take that chance and force them to do it before they change their mind.
But still, we got the (((automobile))) companies to fight against, since Germany is the automobile country and Germans love their cars more than themselves.
Also, lipservice is not only a German politics phenomenon and you should know that.
>"It costs money, so lets not do that"
pathetic..
What's easier to reach in a 10 years frame?
Reactors that create no waste
OR
Clean energy?
If such reactor can come faster, hey, i'm all for it.

That's not too bad because it's such small amounts of thorium and uranium, other heavy metals are a larger problem.
If it's radiation you are worried about then Carbon-14 in the form of ash, CO2 and CO is a way worse problem from that standpoint. Also you will always breathe in those contaminants which is way worse than radiation form outside your body.

Not to mention they double as highly effective bird blenders.

I'm just saying, if you're worried about radioactivity, you get even more from coal plants than you will ever from a nuclear power plant.

Mining for the resources plus loss of efficiency plus extreme maintenance cost plus damage to solar energy levels powering the earth's climate systems.

He's not wrong and people like you are the reason nobody trusts experts anymore. How much they pay you anyway?

>Manufacture wind turbines and solar panels requires:
>Mining equipment
Solar power or wind? Nope
>Shipping vessels
Solar power or wind?
>Processing plants
Solar power or wind? Nope
>More shipping vessels
Solar power or wind? Nope
>Manufacturing plants
Solar power or wind? Nope
>More shipping vessels
Solar power or wind? Nope
>Distributors
Solar power or wind? Maybe
>More shipping vessels
Solar power or wind? Nope
>Installers
Solar power or wind? Nope
>More shipping vessels

Thank god for all that fossilized SOLAR ENERGY to make it possible for retards to believe they can defy the laws of thermodynamics with SOLAR ENERGY

Cali banned lead in bullets because muh birds, meanwhile, the wind mills shred those same birds. They have crews whose only job it is to clean up dead birds, as they attract more birds.

>manufacturing them costs energy
Correct, so does manufacturing literally anything. The amount of energy needed to manufacture them is insignificant compared to other costs.

>make energy creates pollution
See above. It doesn't take much to realize that even if it creates pollution, the net pollution after adding the energy produced by solar into the mix is lower.

>why manufacture something and create pollution that isn't going to end in a netloss of pollution? that's stupid.
>no electric car has been a netloss of pollution.

So I'm not even sure where I should start here. The fact that you have no sources, or that studies in fact show the opposite - that even in worst case scenarios, electric cars are "netlosses of pollution"

>Coals create less lasting waste.
Incorrect. I'd say runaway events are worse than a bit more, thousand year half life waste

>But if we can avoid it, why not?
Because the alternative you took was objectively worse, retard.

>80/20, senpai. 80% of what the govt and the politicians say is pure garbage to gain votes. 20% are burst of sanity.
Have you ever thought that for the EU not only is that more like 98/2, but that we're lagging behind fucking CHINA?

>Also, lipservice is not only a German politics phenomenon and you should know that.
No, it's basically the EU gold standard. And yes, the EU is not the only one with lipservice - it's the only one where it's effectively only lip service.

So wait, why is it not requiring those bad...? Is this a plea for muh jobs?

The waste is put many kilometers under the surface of the earth mr.didnt attend any school.
If that waste was ever to come up from the solid rock, there would have to be a gigantic asteroid hitting the earth in two pieces. In such a situation the nuclear waste would be our smalles worry. Im worried about the environment of your country. You destroy your nature by replacing your nuclear energy with some dirty coal.

He hasn't even responded to me pointing out the exact same thing. It's unironically less safe to block creation of a waste disposal site because nuclear waste right now is not even protected against a sufficiently strong storm or earthquake in their current on-site containment.

He prob lives in socal and sees the wind farms and solar everyday. It's a joke, we PAY to get rid of the extra capacity during the day, then the wind & Sun stop at night, and we have to buy power from other States that don't have crazy regulations.
You read a book, faggot.

>Coals create less lasting waste.

Are you trolling?
Coal power creates acid rains and other extremely dangerous stuff. Even when it functions properly. Why do you want to destroy the world?

>Nuclear plants that create tons of radioactive waste
>what is closed cycle
Your "radioactive waste" is another man's electricity.

I mean, clear solar panels are neat. Now if they can make them viable without massive tax incentives and federal usage mandates that would be better.

There's no such a thing as "nuclear waste" either. That's a media buzzword. All nuclear material is valuable, and can be reused. Elements that give off energy freely are always valuable, and reactor chains can be designed that continue to harness radioactive energy from fuel rods as they decay along the chain. But the time the rods finish up through all the reactors, they give off very little radioactivity and can be diverted into medicine and science.

Anything that gives off energy that can be harnessed has value and use.

Attached: dang ol reaction.jpg (286x402, 58K)

>Coals create less lasting waste.
It creates a lot more wage and a lot more dangerous waste. More radiation, more dangerous radiation and less controllable radiation since it's spread globally through the air. It also sours the area around the plant and causes acid rain in a a large area. It also can cause deposits of dangerous, impure ash.

What's easier to reach in a 10 years frame?
Reactors that create no waste
OR
Clean energy?
If such reactor can come faster, hey, i'm all for it.
One is difficult, the other one is impossible.
Clean energy will never completely replace any energy production because a base load level is always needed for the grid and batteries are not going to cut it, either performance or cost wise. Also even if we perfect solar and wind, both performance and cost wise you would still need several times the avarage load in capacity to even stand a chance of meeting demand in most situations, and still it wont cover demand in all situations.

With reactors we already, and have had for a long time, breeder reactors. China are building new ones. You don't need long term storage for those. You only need middle storage. I was talking about no waste, which is possible but hindered by ignorant activists like you. Current breeder reactors can use waste from other reactors already and severely cut down the storage needs of it and gain energy from it in the process.

Newer coal technologies with updated filters are nearly 100% clean ya retard. Granted, getting the coal isn’t the nicest thing but you don’t live anywhere they do that so why the fuck you care?

This. Also nuclear accidents dont occur unless you try to do some weird stuff because communist party told to do so.

Indeed, and I was agreeing with you. I was just pointing out that radiation from thorium and uranium is negligible from coal. It's the carbon 14, which you will breathe in, that is the problem. More radiation and more dangerous radiation.

Idk but if the right stops entertaining the climate change bullshit and just pushed forward ideas for better living in communities that can deal with it the optics would be incredible. I don't believe in man made climate change, but I would like to live a cleaner life, so I don't use plastics and I use all of the animal for sustenance.

>100% clean
I'm gonna need a source on that as well as examples of how widespread it is

Oh, yeah, I knew you were agreeing, I meant that more as a point to the Kraut since he thinks radioactive waste is sp00ky

I watched about those transparent solar panels, I don't see any downsides for it. It certainty beats solar farms which take too many space. Moreover, it absorbs infrared and ultraviolet, making it ideal for using instead of normal glass for windows in south countries. The only problem might be that the process of making them might me far from green, but it way much useful than the usual solar panels.

Fpbp.

Gen 4 is coming. This kills the climate hoax.

Nuclear all the way.
>inb4 oil shills
It's not perfect but it's pretty damn good.

Fukushima is poisoning the ocean and Industrial kikes are the cause of cancer and virtually all behavioral issues across the planet. Fuck off with this oil slave shit, you will be cleansed like rodents,

Maybe if you used lower power devices, the planet would not be on track for a required reset

> transparent solar panels
I don't get it. If you remove energy from the light passing through the window, will be like tinted glass or will it red-shit the radiation or what?

It is, but will never go mainstream because (they) don't get to milk you financially.

That is black coal not brown.

fuck you, im going to mars and I need a shit ton of energy to get there.

Fukushima got hit with a tsunami, then an earthquake. You're the kike who would rather the goyim live in perpetual poverty rather than figure out how to produce energy from a method other than compressed dinosaur testicles

Wasn't that like a few years ago? Where did all that "transparent" solar panels go?

and you know fukushima did what it did, and radioactive isotopes do what they do, because... kikes told you so. right.

Fukushima is a result of natural disaster, retarded placing, obsolete American reactors, greedy power plant owners who neglected any maintenances and upgrades for said reactors. The problem isn't reactors themselves, but people who use/own them. Private companies put profits above all else after all and rather risk explosion than using even 1% of profits to make sure this explosion didn't happen.

And obviously no one is selling these solar panels but rather giving them to you as a free gift?

youtube.com/watch?v=JAgMVOQePRo
youtube.com/watch?v=qMhdpWMDp04
youtube.com/watch?v=D-U-poohy4s

It's funny how retards like you thing wind turbines and solar panels comes from trees and there is no manufacturing process with any waste...

Typical german who has never stepped his foot outside a city. Same problem here in Finland with those city people.

And the same thing goes with electric cars. They tell you the how clean and everything, but nobody talks about where that "free" electricity comes from, how much waste the manufacturing process make or how long will last the car and how can you dispose it "greenly".

There's no solar or wind solution that can produce more than 15% of our global power requirements without destroying our prosperity.
We're at something like 2% of our global power is wind or solar.
No amount of inventions or innovations will bring us to a point where we can rely on wind or solar as a primary energy source. Every 10-20 years wind turbines need replacing and solar also has a life span. The industrial process for making the components for these, is very environmentally damaging. Is it better then coal? Sure, it is at the moment.
But imagine if you had to go from 2% global power by wind and solar to 50%. Imagine all the turbines you would have to manufacture. Then they have a limited life span and so you have to keep manufacturing parts for all those things.
Is the popution worse or better qt that point, then coal?
Nuclear power plants also need a lot of maintaining and are expensive to build but it's worth it because of their large amount of power output.

There are lots of ideas but the only one that has the potential to reduce the cost electricity while improving the environment is nuclear.

>minimal lifestyle
>butterfly corkscrew
Get on my level, pleb.

Attached: ahso.jpg (1500x1500, 123K)

Apparently there's a few companies that producing them already, but they all in various stages of testing. Probably another year or two before they hit the market if they prove to be cost effective, and even then I suspect they will work with big companies first that will use panels for the skyscrapers. If that's the case, we won't see them for another 2-5 years.

youtube.com/watch?v=R__xAPskQg8
pv-magazine-australia.com/2019/01/31/clearvue-pv-trials-a-solar-portal-to-the-future/

The advantage Thorium has is how common a resource it is, much more so than Uranium. If we managed to get a working LFTR-reactor online we could use that technology to have energy for thousands of years.

No, Fukushima was wilfully neglected in design in a country that gets hit by huge natural disasters. Things in Japan are actually horrible, the country is run by organised crime and it has one of the highest amounts of debt. Japan needs to be held accountable for that shit.

That being said, Nuclear is great in a well regulated industry. The west is over regulated so it is a perfect match, I'd say other cultures shouldn't even bother with it. Imagine how fucking lax the regulators would be in Italy or wherever.

Electric cars are not a net loss yet. The electricity they are powered on is still produced by coal in most cases, as well as the plants they are produced in.

This sounds like bullshit man, if it collects IR it's just a thermoelectric and it would still keep the fan spinning when the guys hand is in front of the panel. UV is not produced by indoor lights like those shown. The reason solar panels are opaque is because the photons of visible light get absorbed and an electron gets excited to a higher electronic state. If the electron "hole" and the excited electron recombine then nothing can be done with that electron as far as generating a current so you want to minimize recombination. In the IR range these excited states are too close in energy to be of any use for current generation and selection rules decrease probabilities for exciting to states many quanta above the ground state. UV I could believe excites to states useable for current generation but the spectrum of light reaching the earth is significantly higher in visible than in UV thanks to the atmosphere so ultimately making these panels transparent sounds like mental masturbation more than anything. Windows are also not ideal for use in solar panels because sunlight transmitted to the photoactive material is maximized when the light source is normal to the panel (i.e the direction of the panel is perpendicular to the light rays) and this is maybe a few minutes out of the entire day. This is all without mentioning the fact that electrical use is maximized at nighttime when there is no sunlight. Thanks for reading my rant

Attached: 1545005905832.png (1084x656, 283K)

>I'm running a business
>I have assets, overhead and employees
>NOPE NOT GONNA PAY FOR MAINTENANCE, NOT GONNA PAY THE WAGE, NOT GONNA PAY OVERHEAD, NOT GONNA PAY NOTHING
>100% PROFITS ALL MINE AND THEY STILL HAVE TO DO WHAT I SAY MUAHAHAHA

Attached: images.jpg (299x168, 8K)

>there are not that many nuclear powerplants but there were already multiple incidents of economical disasters at great scale because of this safe nuclear reactors.

Twice, not multiple incidents. One was decades ago with an unsafe reactor and another was caused by a fucking 9 richter earthquake. Tell me again how a nuclear reactor is unsafe in places far from the borders of tectonic plates?

No nukes from Thorium... :((((

because nuclear is scary word
like nuke
boom boom

Solar energy destroyes the planet. They are created from extremely toxic substances and mining the required rare-earth minerals is a catastrophe for environment. But hey, it's okay to destroy environment as long as it isn't in your backyard.