Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple to Build Two of the World's Largest Wind Turbines in Net-Zero Climate Impact Pledge
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The World’s Largest Nuclear Fusion Reactor Is Finally Being Built | OilPrice.com
After 35 years of preparation and delays, scientists have finally started to assemble the world’s largest nuclear fusion reactor in France
oilprice.com
There's a rather nasty group of idiots called the Extinction Rebellion. Mostly ignorant or misinformed, they're like the Eco-Taleban and would rather us all go back to the caves and eat lentils than fly in an aircraft. Their spokesperson, a woman called Zion Lights (yes, that is the name she was given) was, of course all for solar and wind turbines and all the rest, and vehemently opposed to gas, coal, oil and, of course, evil, deadly nuclear.
Until she actually looked into it properly. And now she is a convert to the cause of nuclear power, because it is, as she found out for herself, the only realistic way forward. Windmills and solar will not, by any calculation, provide enough energy. Hats off to her for being honest and open-minded enough to change her mind and go with it. If only more people could do the same we'd stand a better chance.
Read what she says here:
www.cityam.com
If you are opposed to nuclear because of all the usually negative propaganda you've been fed, then you need to do some actual, honest research. Don't read stuff that you already agree with - read what the other side says and you might be surprised.
Until she actually looked into it properly. And now she is a convert to the cause of nuclear power, because it is, as she found out for herself, the only realistic way forward. Windmills and solar will not, by any calculation, provide enough energy. Hats off to her for being honest and open-minded enough to change her mind and go with it. If only more people could do the same we'd stand a better chance.
Read what she says here:
A message from a former Extinction Rebellion activist: Fellow environmentalists, join me in embracing nuclear power
As the lockdown measures we have become so familiar with over the past three months are slowly eased, discussions are turning to how to move forward with
If you are opposed to nuclear because of all the usually negative propaganda you've been fed, then you need to do some actual, honest research. Don't read stuff that you already agree with - read what the other side says and you might be surprised.
And why do you think that everyone is so keen to get to the Moon all of a sudden? Hmmm...
An entire article about a wind turbine and they don't even mention the rated capacity.
On-shore is somewhat maxxed out at 5MW(ish) currently.
If the 200m is the hub height that could really be a monster... probably in the 7MW class...
On-shore is somewhat maxxed out at 5MW(ish) currently.
If the 200m is the hub height that could really be a monster... probably in the 7MW class...
And yet only a tiny amount of nuclear waste needs to get wasted before we all get wasted.
Here's a question for you, would you rather have a wind, solar, or nuclear energy plant within 5km of your home? For me, the answer is 100% clear cut solar. Wind is too ugly (and possibly horrendous low frequency noise issues), and nuclear too risky. Yeah, I get it, nuclear is just fine, just as long as it's not too close to my home, right?
Solar in itself is efficient enough, and getting more and more efficient, and will clearly overtake everything, and already partly has. Battery technology has mass investment in various different pathways, and remains an issue, but is also getting cheaper as efficiency and economies of scale increase.
Not hearing me.
Read something that is reviewed. By peers.
Look. You’re missing the point. Again. Read something peer reviewed. Come back to us after.There's a rather nasty group of idiots called the Extinction Rebellion. Mostly ignorant or misinformed, they're like the Eco-Taleban and would rather us all go back to the caves and eat lentils than fly in an aircraft. Their spokesperson, a woman called Zion Lights (yes, that is the name she was given) was, of course all for solar and wind turbines and all the rest, and vehemently opposed to gas, coal, oil and, of course, evil, deadly nuclear.
Until she actually looked into it properly. And now she is a convert to the cause of nuclear power, because it is, as she found out for herself, the only realistic way forward. Windmills and solar will not, by any calculation, provide enough energy. Hats off to her for being honest and open-minded enough to change her mind and go with it. If only more people could do the same we'd stand a better chance.
Read what she says here:
A message from a former Extinction Rebellion activist: Fellow environmentalists, join me in embracing nuclear power
As the lockdown measures we have become so familiar with over the past three months are slowly eased, discussions are turning to how to move forward with
If you are opposed to nuclear because of all the usually negative propaganda you've been fed, then you need to do some actual, honest research. Don't read stuff that you already agree with - read what the other side says and you might be surprised.
Oh, I can hear you alright, and I understand everything you say, but I'm not sure you understand what you are saying. Peer review: Peer review for 'climate science' is broken. You can now only be a 'peer' and review papers if you go along with the CAGW line. If you hold a different opinion, you can't be a peer, so papers that make it through the process are skewed. This is well known, and a source of enormous frustration to many scientists holding a different view. Scientists, researchers and academics have lost their jobs and positions over this.
Nuclear energy - currently fission, but hopefully soon fusion, is the only way forward. The data doesn't support any other position. Anyone who knows anything about the subject will tell you that, because it's true. Wind and solar serve a different purpose, and that is to channel funds towards investors and landowners in the form of subsidies. Take away the subsidies and the economics are laid bare. Factor in the cost of production, transportation, installation, maintenance and disposal, and all the nasty CO2 that's created throughout that cycle and you'll get a completely different picture. By far the worst form of energy production is offshore wind farms. The numbers speak for themselves, if you bother to look.
If you want a small example of this bias that you can try out for yourself, try editing a climate page on Wikipedia so that it includes a contrary opinion. I guarantee that within the hour your edit will have been edited out, and if you keep trying you'll eventually get barred. Find out who William Connelly is. I know, it's Wikipedia, but it's an indicator of a wider malaise within the field of climate research. Try to get funding for a project that goes against the grain. Try to get an article published in a magazine or online. You're in for a hard time. And that's not because they're right. This is science - science is never settled, and is and must be always open to opposing views - it's how the process is supposed to work. Suppressing contrary opinions is just plain wrong. So is massaging the data, excluding data that doesn't agree with the model, for instance, the Medieval Warm Period. This was a real thing, but there has been a concerted effort to massage it away as it's inconvenient and annoying. That's dishonest, at best. Same with Polar Bear numbers. They're not endangered by melting sea ice, but are currently at record numbers. This is actually god news, but goes contrary to the party line so must be suppressed or massaged away. Why? Why would you deny obviously good news?
The Myth That the Polar Bear Population Is Declining | Jon Miltimore
Data from conservation groups and the government show that the polar bear population is roughly five times what it was in the 1950s and three or four times what it was in the 1970s when polar bears became protected under international treaty.
fee.org
Eventually, the truth will out, as always happens.
And much more expensive. This is on offshore wind:
Offshore wind power vast boondoggle that New York can no longer afford
Offshore wind is the renewable-energy industry’s shiny new toy. Led by New York, seven Atlantic-coast states have now imposed mandates to expand offshore wind use over the next decade, with the Emp…
nypost.com
All the numbers are public and can easily be checked. But who's paying for all this? You are - the consumer.
Have a look at this: https://strom-report.de/electricity-prices-europe/
Who's got the most expensive electricity, and why? And look how the prices are going to increase, as coal, gas and nuclear get taken out and replaced with eco-friendly renewables. Who voted for that?
BTW - I live in Hungary, where we don't have huge wind or solar farms, and one nuclear plant supplies about 50% of the electricity for the whole country. The plant is being expanded to cope with forecast demand.
Am I happy with that? You bet I am! They can build one in my backyard if they want. Rather that than a bloody wind farm.
You keep mentioning opinion. But it’s science. There is no room for opinion in science. It works with fact.
It's time for cities in America to go renewable. Wellington New Zealand is nearly 100% powered through renewable energy sources, wind and solar. It CAN BE DONE! Many cities and towns 'down there' are powered by renewable energy.
We seem stuck on nursing off of the petroleum monopolies. Corporate America should be leaders.
We seem stuck on nursing off of the petroleum monopolies. Corporate America should be leaders.
And much more expensive. This is on offshore wind:
Offshore wind power vast boondoggle that New York can no longer afford
Offshore wind is the renewable-energy industry’s shiny new toy. Led by New York, seven Atlantic-coast states have now imposed mandates to expand offshore wind use over the next decade, with the Emp…
All the numbers are public and can easily be checked. But who's paying for all this? You are - the consumer.
Have a look at this: https://strom-report.de/electricity-prices-europe/
Who's got the most expensive electricity, and why? And look how the prices are going to increase, as coal, gas and nuclear get taken out and replaced with eco-friendly renewables. Who voted for that?
BTW - I live in Hungary, where we don't have huge wind or solar farms, and one nuclear plant supplies about 50% of the electricity for the whole country. The plant is being expanded to cope with forecast demand.
Am I happy with that? You bet I am! They can build one in my backyard if they want. Rather that than a bloody wind farm.
No surprise here, but this is yet another Micheal Moore movie that is biased and at times wildly inaccurate.
I won't quote the Wiki post, or the many other articles that slay this environmental smear attack, but it's rather damning of the movie. Being called 'dated' in the evidence that is being used to slam the renewables industry is quite a condemnation. The industry has changed quite a bit over the last few years. Moore's agenda has been called into question more and more over the years. Having lived in the state he calls home, he doesn't have as much support there as he seems to have elsewhere. The idea that he would back a 'dated' film to attack saving the environment, saving our future, even if it's not a 100% fix is devoid of logic. He seems to be trying to attract attention, and reveling in the controversy. That is a malignant urge, and so totally not productive. Moore should sit on his laurels and stop trying to draw attention to himself. I'm embarrassed for him.
Oh brother. New Zealand is mostly sheep, not people.
Not exactly true. I met many wonderful real human beings there. Auckland is a lot like New York, or Chicago. Ton of people. Funny...
If only those would work reliably, consistently and efficiently outside of any laboratory.
I mean, you're right, but sadly we're not even close to have them operational.
Isn’t the main issue with nuclear the question what to do with that super toxic waste other than du,p it somewhere in the hope that it will never get back into nature?
In fairness though, I much prefer looking at some turbines than at a coal or nuclear plant.
Yeah, when I look at wind turbines, each spin from their blades, I think about how that's less pollution in the air that I breathe. I don't know how that wouldn't bring comfort .... it does to me anyway. I've seen some parts of CA where there are hundreds if not thousands of these on the hillside and ... again... each spinning turbine makes me think how that's less exhaust from a CNG power plant (here in California) or coal. <shrug>.
All around hilarious. Thanks for this comedy piece.
CCP virus, ROFL.
you forgot to recommend the bleach brand you use for your morning drink!