[–] goatsandbros 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[–] bman0321 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Wood is truly a renewable energy. That shit grows on trees!

[–] goatsandbros 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

But cutting down old-growth carbon sinks, shipping them across the Atlantic by cargo vessels that burn oil, and then burning them doesn't seem "green."

[–] littul_kitton 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Good grief! Thanks for posting this. It needs wider exposure.

[–] Ex-Redditor 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

The UK might of forgot to mention gas!

What Simon Evans Forgot To Tell You!

May 7, 2018


[–] BaldMiscreant 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

They're burning a different sort of coal, now.

[–] derram 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

https://archive.fo/crBjz :

The U.K. Just Went 55 Hours Without Using Coal for the First Time in History - Bloomberg

'The government aims to switch off all coal plants by 2025 and has given renewables priority access to the grid. '

'It also has fields of solar panels that are meeting more and more demand as old traditional power plants close permanently. '

'The U.K. was an early adopter of renewable energy and has more offshore wind turbines installed than any other country. '

'Coal, which fueled the world’s biggest economies for more than a century, is increasingly losing out to renewables. '

'At the same time wind turbines produced more power. '

This has been an automated message.

[–] Nutkase 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

They always forget to mention brown coal when they say these things. Cheap dirty coal that's basically everywhere 100ft deep they dig up, they mean imported coal.

[–] 475677 2 points 0 points (+2|-2) ago 

Renewable energy is a fucking joke. It's like people ignore the initial damage to the environment caused by creating solar panels in particular but the footprint of any of them in general, expect them to live forever with minimal maintenance and be fueled by the environment like sucking out energy en masse in one area won't have a butterfly effect in another. Using fossil fuels isn't much better but shit if we were actually serious about it we'd all be investing in thorium reactors until fusion becomes a reality.

[–] albatrosv15 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

in thorium reactors until fusion becomes a reality.

Eh, you lost me there. Everything was logical until that last part.

[–] 475677 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

What's wrong with thorium and eventually fusion reactors other than the fact they used to keep saying fusion is 50 years away? Thorium has already been proven viable as an alternative to standard nuclear reactors although their power output is a bit less which means more reactors are needed but that said thorium is a hell of alot more common than uranium and thorium reactors don't create all the super shitty isotopes like plutonium as well. As far as I can tell it's the best solution we have until fusion becomes a reality for the general public and although I have no proof there were posts on the chans that this type of shit from lockheed is 50 years behind what they have in what I believe they called their black building which housed all the off limits technology they weren't willing to share just yet.


[–] HeavyBrain 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

Whats the record for not suppressing news about muds raping kids?