Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumSaving 99,680 acres of land from being developed for energy: The right thing for the wrong reason.
As I often note, the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant, on a physical footprint of 12 acres, routinely and constantly, out produces in electrical generation all of the wind turbines in California spread over thousands of square miles of developed wilderness.
Sources of Electrical Energy Production (California Energy Commission)
I am, as anyone familiar with my writings will know, not a fan of so called "renewable energy," regarding it as a wasteful unsustainable mass and land intensive scheme for which enthusiasm and the loss of trillions of dollars has only left the planet in flames.
Nobody here has any use for the orange pedophile in the White House, but once in a while his vindictive policies unintentionally have a positive effect, although he's way too stupid to recognize how this is so. He actually believes that wind energy will suppress the use of fossil fuels, when the opposite is clearly true. The data on this point is unambiguous. The wind industry has done nothing, zero, zilch, nada to arrest the ongoing and accelerating collapse of the planetary atmosphere. So called "renewable energy" depends on access to fossil fuels, despite all the battery and (worse) hydrogen bullshit we hear here.
The bulk of the following article is behind a paywall, but the available paragraph nonetheless demonstrates about what I am speaking:
A nuclear power plant 120 miles from Boise? This company wants to build one
Very little of the 320 acres dedicated to the proposed nuclear plant would actually consist of the nuclear plant itself. The high energy to mass ratio of nuclear fuels, which is the key to why they are environmentally superior to all other forms of primary energy, means that as is the case at Diablo Canyon, most of that surface area while formally belonging to the plant, will remain untouched. It is also true that no redundant systems will be required to be built (and buried, as the so called "renewable energy" aficionados unconscionably and consistently neglect in their handwaving exercises that, to repeat, left the planet in flames).
I have no use for the wind industry, but for very different reasons than the orange pedophilic dementia patient in the White House. I think he actually believes that the wind industry is good for the environment, and thus despises it. There are people all around the world who believe the same thing, that the wind industry is good for the environment, when clearly the opposite is true. The wind industry is a disaster making things worse faster, not better nor not even slower. My reasoning, unlike the dementia patient, is that the mass and land intensity, coupled with unreliability that thus requires redundancy, almost always using fossil fuels, make the so called "renewable energy" reactionary scheme environmentally appalling, unsustainable, and frankly, rather dirty.
Have a nice day tomorrow.