Imagine if there was a technology that gave you some 10% of its advertise output on average...

it's not inefficient, just expensive

Can you use HP like a normal person instead of that kw shit? Thanks.

are you comparing a laptop thats built to run at a specific specification and the weather?

Attached: 345363.jpg (200x313, 10K)

>he doesn't drive through school zones in 1st
>he probably physically can't drive through school zones in 1st because he has a nanny-state trasmission that tells him what gear to be in at all times

Your solar array will have to cease and desist resembling the Mickey Mouse™ logo. You have 30 days before further action is taken.

Regards
Adam Silverstein
Copyright Lawyer

Fusion Power Plants when

>I have a Toyota Aqua, so I'll usually rev up and use the ICE to hit 70km/h, but once I'm there I can cruise on electric at 10~15KW for as long as I like.
Now imagine there's no gas pedal and how much power the engine generates is effectively random.

soon.
20 years ago it was soon too btw.

altadevices.com/technology/

>technolology will save us

They have one in Europe already

>hydro isn't renewable
Fucking build more of these. Problem solved.

Attached: 1.jpg (852x480, 41K)

The whole clean/renewable energy stuff is bullshit anyway, the generation itself is only a part of something much larger, from equipment manufacture to energy storage to battery utilization to what said energy is used on and so on.
Nevermind hydroelectric power plants eco fuckery and that sort of thing.

>just make more mountains and rivers problem solve lmao

hydro is only bad if it's overused, niagara falls powers like a fucking huge area with only one dam

I can it's called an ISP being a dick with speeds and data caps.

This my friends is why we need nuclear until we can invent some better shit.
No horrid pollution, no unreliable shit that only generate power when we actually less need it.

But lithium battery FULL recycling could be a solution as well.
Cheap out the batteries until you can use em to not make solar/wind sucks dicks.

>imagine if your specie causes all the world's problems but you advertise is as a good thing
this is white people

Based and greenpilled

Multiply everything by 0.745699872 if you wanna be in a place the automotive industry left three decades ago
>nanny-state trasmission
Aqua motherfucker, it has a planetary power split device.
My engine can be in whatever sweet spot I want, engine revving full, able to push every last bit of power to the wheels no matter their speed.
I drive EVERYWHERE in first.

Now imagine this is the analogy you stick with when describing a system that's perfectly predictable and simulatable, so much so that if you buy solar panels today, you can run software that'll tell you with 95% accuracy exactly how much power they would have generated 10 years from now.
Using a system that consumes power as an analogy for one that produces it is fundamentally flawed, but just for fun:
It'd be like getting in a self driving car and being pissed the engine isn't constantly red-lining, thinking that you mustn't be getting the full power of the car (While ignoring the speed limits existence entirely)

2040 for the first one that isn't just a lab test, I think.

>risk of earthquake damage, forcible relocation of entire riverside populations, kills fish and fishing industry, fucking extincted the yangtze dolphin
f*ing great renewable energy right there

They haven't finished one that works over-synergy yet, and once they get it working (Expected mid 20's), there's another two decades till they make one that's able to produce enough power to run a small town.

As someone soon finishing an environmental science degree I wholeheartedly agree. It's the one industry where people take safety seriously.

Chernobyl radiation is still present throughout Europe more than 30 years later.
>hurr that was old tech and drunk Russians
Fukushima happened a few years ago.

The problem is that there's no way to dispose of the waste and the final storage solutions we have are punchlines. It's ludicrious how terrible we are at managing them.

Use the waste as DU bullets and shoot them into 3rd world countries that won't discover radiation technology for another 1000 years

>Chernobyl radiation is still present throughout Europe more than 30 years later.
Radiation is present everywhere on earth.

>Fukushima happened a few years ago.
And caused no appreciable environmental harm outside the immediate locality aka the plant itself.

Clean Coal and Safe Fracking are a thing but libtards want us to believe that they are somehow causing water and air pollution. Tell me fags, how EXACTLY are Clean Coal and Safe Fracking polluting the waters? Do you REALLY think that your boogieman "Johnny Capitalist" is INTENTIONALLY dumping toxins into public water supplies? Use your fucking brains for once.

Nuclear to waste is easy to deal with, the 10K years radioactive thing is a meme, anything that takes that long is so weakly radioactive that you would have to be sleeping next to it to be in any danger. The very radioactive stuff can be used as fuel.

>what if not polluting ends up being a hoax and we clean up our emissions for nothing
imagine being this big of a corporate oil cuck

Brazil here, we have three nuclear reactors.

Also we have one of the worst nuclear accidents in history but it was just a bunch of apes fucking around with an X-Ray machine.

>this isn't pasta
Nu-Jow Forums

>This my friends is why we need nuclear
Only if cancer treatment is included for free

>Radiation is present everywhere on earth.
It's actual dangerous radiation. To the point that most boars caught in Germany aren't safe to eat.

>And caused no appreciable environmental harm outside the immediate locality aka the plant itself.
The area will be toxic for centuries and require regular maintenance.

Clean Coal isn't clean coal.
Safe Fracking isn't safe fracking.
They're just marketing terms.
The real redpill is to go nuclear and dump the nuclear waste in the ocean.

The options are not having electricity at night or lung cancer from the coal.

>Do you REALLY think that your boogieman "Johnny Capitalist" is INTENTIONALLY dumping toxins into public water supplies?
Yes. Because that's the option for waste disposal that impacts Johnny Capitalist's bottom line the least. As long as Johnny gets his money, fuck everyone else.

>The options are not having electricity at night
What is wind, solar, and hydro?

Fuck you.

What is geography?

no, it's the CHINESE

Where? We have shitloads of sparsely populated flyover country perfect for wind farms

This thread brought to you by Clean Coal Gang

Works only when it's windy, works only at daylight, works only when you have something to build hydro off.
And as i pointed on the original post, there is the possibility of making em not suck if we can recycle the lithium batteries well enough, because at the moment, they're just too fucking expensive and keep running out of juice.

>unironically thinking capitalist eggecutives won’t fuck over the environment for a few extra billion

Attached: 49798697-180C-44BE-8A50-F4BA9CEC090C.jpg (1029x703, 54K)

Everyone listen to this user here, he knows what's up.
All those tardos should wake up and see that final storage is a meme, literally just use the waste as fuel lmao.

>dump the nuclear waste in the ocean
Yeah, because there's no way that dumping this shit into the barely understood thing that keeps this planet alive could possibly go wrong.
At least store it somewhere utterly irrelevant to the planet, like Australia.

youtube.com/watch?v=u_K1URyarE0

>what is storage
not sure if retarded or just trolling

>Works only when it's windy
Have you ever been to the high plains?

PV average 15%-17% efficiency, while really good ones are 22%+. Also, no one ever advertises them at 100%.

>what is storage
A thing we're not as good at doing as you think we are.

>if I defend my corporate masters they will reward me

>what is storage

AHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAHAHAAHAAHAHHAHAAHHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHHA

Attached: 1549696310205.png (750x711, 87K)

You're defending corporate masters as well.

29.1 for commercial PV is available already. see and video @ >A thing we're not as good at doing as you think we are.
define "good"

we know and are building lots of alternatives. even pumping water is one of those. and that's something simple and well known.

Good enough to be competitive in price with coal.
I think it will get there, but right now it is not.

>I think it will get there, but right now it is not.
businessinsider.com/solar-power-cost-decrease-2018-5
production is already cheaper than coal, according to that article
storage, I dunno, but I bet concentrated solar power towers are already included in those prices.
I'm not an expert, btw.

>implying I actually want east Asia or the entire continent of Africa having any form of power for their overgrown population.

I'm not disagreeing with nuclear energy...however...accidents have happened in the past. And even though they were somewhat well kept within western nations, you can only imagine the shit that could happen in other places.

Also Fukushima was a pretty bad disaster, tons of nuclear waste ended up sipping into the waters of the pacific.

which isnt a viable solution because you cant build more hydropower dams due to it causing local environmental destruction. All the "solutions" that are right around the corner are far off, it's just grasping at straws.

>everyone ITT not speccing into lava energy tech tree
y'all a bunch of tists

Attached: G E O T H E R M A L.jpg (731x1390, 76K)

Yes, i know the generation already is, but storage is the white elephant in the room.

You do want to bring power to africa, but you want to bring anime to it as well.

production is cheaper when all the times it doesnt produce power is covered by coal plants that lose money because of solar overproduction in the day. It's gonna take a literal redesign of the electric grid to make renewables work, That doesnt come cheap

>which isnt a viable solution
>storage is the white elephant in the room
small dams are ONE solution, of the many alternatives there are.
solar power towers keep hot molten salts as energy storage, and, AFAIU, that works well TODAY.

>but you want to bring anime to it as well
Noooooooo, I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemies. Plus there's always the chance that they do produce, but the children are now even worse than the parents. I'll give you a hint, look at the current generation of kids in the US.

>Also Fukushima was a pretty bad disaster, tons of nuclear waste ended up sipping into the waters of the pacific.
The UN, WHO disagrees with you.
>From a global health perspective, the health risks directly related to radiation exposure are low in Japan and extremely low in neighbouring countries and the rest of the world.

Even for workers who were at the site and exposed,
>Considering the level of estimated doses, the lifetime radiation-induced cancer risks other than thyroid are small and much smaller than the lifetime baseline cancer risks. Regarding the risk of thyroid cancer in exposed infants and children, the level of risk is uncertain since it is difficult to verify thyroid dose estimates by direct measurements of radiation exposure.

Basically the worst part of the "disaster" was how the Jap government handled it by evacuating a bunch of old people not at risk and putting them under undue stress.

You can also just build cranes that lift heavy things then slowly release them when needed. Very simple and environmental design. Some initial cost, but then just minor maintenance.

ITER only recently broke ground. It's a proof of concept, only
we are pretty much at peak damned and pump storage in the US and other western nations
you're a child
Any transuranics with extreme danger were gone after 60-120 days. you probably think the longer the half-life the worse something is? I would be a horse you don't even understand alpha, beta decay, decay chains in general, background radiation or the like....but that will never stop you from spouting off about things you have near zero knowledge about.
we can literally recycle or reprocess any and all nuclear fuel - up to 98.5% and stick the rest in a giant salt deposit or deep in a mountain (where, guess what - there are radioactive minerals).
This is accurate. You could sleep with Uranium Oxide mineral next to your head and would increase your risk to developing a cancer to a less degree than taking a transatlantic flight at high altitude.
yeah, one of you monkeys at an alpha decaying isotope...like, wtf?
you can extract cancer killing isotopes from certain types of nuclear reactors/decay chains. The stuff is actually very rare and we are running out of it since we do not use breeder reactors.
high efficiency photovolatiacs require mass amounts of a rare earth elements (radioactive mining. Also, most proposed solar futures would require a replacement rate of 40 square kilometers of PV panels EVERY SINGLE DAY - that is with full pump/hyrdo and wind already active.

>old tech
Chernobyl was actually a very new experimental reactor with the added functionality of breeding plutonium. And the accident happened due to manual fuckery.

Aside from being environmental disasters, hydropower is already tapped out. There are not many new locations where you can build dams.

>The real redpill is to go nuclear and dump the nuclear waste in the ocean.
make a space elevator and railgun the waste into the sun*

dam, guess we're stuck with nuclear then.

theverge.com/2017/2/24/14733094/radioactive-pigs-boars-czech-republic-central-europe-germany-chernobyl

Check the article's sources. It's a consulting firm for solar power industry. If you want to know how cheap solar power is, look at how much it actually costs in countries and localities that use solar. Pro tip: it's quite expensive.

>Cs-137 has a half-life of ~30 years, news at 11

everyone knows about the wild boars. nobody cares and they aren't a big deal. I recommend not using "the verge" as a means of forming an opinion on scientific matters. the coal, natural gas and geothermal (yes, geothermal is radioactive steam) plants in the area put more radiation into the atmosphere and cause more risk than anything in or around chernobyl.

Anyone who is curious, NHK made a documentary two years later, you can see how "dangerous" it was.

you could pump water into the dams that already exist

>high efficiency photovolatiacs require mass amounts of a rare earth elements (radioactive mining.
the 29% efficiency ones are thin films that use tiny amounts of GaAs. you obviously didn't even click on the links I posted.

>Also, most proposed solar futures would require a replacement rate of 40 square kilometers of PV panels EVERY SINGLE DAY - that is with full pump/hyrdo and wind already active.
more efficiency means less area to cover. and you could mix all those energy sources. and even then, you don't need to rely 100% on "green" energy.

my country (chile) does. prices of green energy have fallen like crazy. sadly, we still rely mostly on dams and thermoelectric sources, so in general, energy for us soho consumers is still quite expensive.

>you could pump water into the dams that already exist
You do realize that's already done, right?

and? just keep doing it by using solar energy instead of coal/hydro energy. no need to waste money by building new dams.
again, lots of alternatives.

>yes individually all the solutions to the MASSIVE problems of renewables suck, but together they'll be fine somehow

why is this always the argument. THE SOLUTIONS FUCKING SUCK

pumping up water isnt viable because we have too few dams for the demand, turbines and other potential energy stores arent efficient enough in the reuse of the energy and would have to be absolutely massive and coordinated to work efficiently, which costs enormous amounts of money. Money that should just be invested into nuclear.

>but muh radiation that killed 1 person in fukushima
you people are ruining our planet because you're so focused on an ideal instead of realistic solutions.

>and? just keep doing it by using solar energy instead of coal/hydro energy
You do realize you can't just infinitely pump water back into a reservoir? There isn't a large reserve of reservoir capacity; I don't know why you would think such a thing exists, other than ignorance.

The 40 sqkm a day is based off the most efficient current design (as in not even commercially available). This was the Stanford study and response. You aren't going to operate a smelter on solar unless you saline pump the entire desert for lithium and build batteries the size of skyscrapers.
Nuclear is the best and only option. Any other opinion is purely set in ignorance of engineering, manufacturing, geology, scale, physics and the like.

then don't pump water, lift rocks -> . higher weight -> more efficient, I suppose.

seriously, why are you people so obsessed? stop arguing. the alternatives are there.
also, I haven't even mentioned nuclear ITT.

we have a big ass reactor that powers this whole fucking planet: the sun. we already take advantage of it (otherwise, we'd be dead already), let's try to squeeze more energy from it before trying to play god.

>my country (chile) does. prices of green energy have fallen like crazy. sadly, we still rely mostly on dams and thermoelectric sources,
Your country (Chile) gets 63% of its electricity from fossil fuels, 33% from hydro (being a mountainous as fuck country helps), and the remaining 4% or whatever from renewables.

>seriously, why are you people so obsessed? stop arguing. the alternatives are there.
You mean like all those alternatives you mentioned that turned out didn't actually exist in functional form?

that's what I said. change only started some 8 years ago, and only because of prices are high in here. chilean capitalists don't like risk, they want easy money, and there was no easy money in "green" energy until very recently.

>we can literally recycle or reprocess any and all nuclear fuel - up to 98.5% and stick the rest in a giant salt deposit or deep in a mountain (where, guess what - there are radioactive minerals).
Then why the fuck aren't we?

I just explained why they're not viable wtf. They're incredibly expensive and inefficient, do you even understand what I'm saying to you? If it was as easy as you're describing it, it would have happened in large scale somewhere, like Germany for example. But it isn't

Because Jimmy Carter passed a law banning reprocessing of nuclear waste.