@jwildeboer @hrw the problem is that you cannot store solar energy from summer for winter, at least not at the moment and in foreseeable future. So in winter you end up burning either coal or natural gas which both are almost equally terrible for the climate.
That's why we need a mix.
Wind blows in every season and my solarcells on my roof also produce in sunny winter days.
Not as much as in the summer of cause.
@dexternemrod @jwildeboer @hrw solar panel produce roughly 15% of what they do in summer. I've got them on the roof, too.
A mix of renewables is fine, but still far from needed stability.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for renewables. I've got my own photovoltaic, I invest in renewable companies, but I can't close my eyes before a fact that we're decades away from relying on them fully. Until then coal or gas if not nuclear.
I see your point ( and can confirm the ~15%).
And to be honest: Besides seeing storage as an import part of the solution, I am not sure what my opinion on nuclear is.
I'm not sure if the direct benefit by not producing CO2 (or at least less) weights more than the issue with the waste or if it is the other way round.
@dexternemrod @jwildeboer @hrw I'm not a big fan of nuclear, but I think that the climate change is such a great threat to humanity that having nuclear waste stored in rock 1km underground for 1000 years seems like a smaller problem to me. Renewables are my preference, but when it comes to fossil vs nuclear I lean to nuclear.
@sesivany FTR, Uranium 235 will take 200.000 years to decay back to the natural level of raw uranium. Uranium 238 is millions of years. The German regulations require a stability of 1 million years(!) for final storage. @dexternemrod @hrw
@jwildeboer @sesivany @dexternemrod @hrw nuclear has been displaced by coal in Germany. Coal is also radioactive ( https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste/ ) but that’s now pumped into the air instead of being stored safely.
And that just the radioactivity, coal is way more deadly in many other ways
@dexternemrod Are you kidding us? We went through this already many, many times in the comments. Renewables keep on growing in Germany, slower as hoped/needed but it grows. 46% last year. See https://social.wildeboer.net/@jwildeboer/110205538979399097 @vincent @sesivany @hrw
So we should 'close' this threat to avoid duplicates in the comments.
@dexternemrod This us the Fediverse :) I cannot close a thread. I also don’t want to. But I really wish people would engage in a discussion by reading the other comments too instead of merely copy/pasting another standard counter. Le sigh :( @vincent @sesivany @hrw
I can totaly understand this.
Maybe the issue is that you are to famouse around here and attract to many commenters ; )
Redundand comments start to be a pain, so I'll promise to do better next time : )
@dexternemrod Hahaha! I'm not famous, just grumpy :) @vincent @sesivany @hrw
@dexternemrod @vincent @jwildeboer @hrw Germany has made a huge leap towards renewables. Over 50% of electricity from renewables already? That's a great achievement! It's a question if the transition can realisticly go much faster.
@vincent
@jwildeboer @sesivany @hrw
I think this is the biggest issue: There was the decision to stop using nuclear power but no incentive or at least 'eco friendly' regulations to build renewables.
So the goto solution seems to be fossil ...
To quote this weird orange politician: "Sad!"