• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    55 hours ago

    I agree with all of what you said, apart from “without storage renewables aren’t that useful”.

    UK and USA are good comparatives here, where the USA has better nuclear provision, but on average very little renewables (approx 10%). The UK obviously burns more fossil fuels when renewables aren’t used, but in spite of this still generates less than 1/3 of the co2 per KW overall as the USA (120g vs 390g).

    So storage would be drive that down much further, but even without it, more renewables equals less CO2 overall in pretty much every real world case.

    Data sources in CO2 per KW: UK: https://grid.iamkate.com/ USA: https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=74&t=11

    • @Mihies
      link
      14 hours ago

      Sure, I agree that it helps, but only as long as you are emitting co2 as an alternative. Not sure whether comparison to USA is a good one since they ditched new nuclear plants after Three Mile Island accident. Try comparing against France though - they are the greenest and most reliable energy producer out there (maybe Scandinavian countries are better, but they have excellent predispositions). And then we have Germany, which went diehard renewable with the side effect of becoming one of the biggest European polluter.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        53 hours ago

        Germany definitely has a tonne of renewables, but then is still like 25% coal which is why it has high energy emmisions. It has much cleaner energy than it did before adopting renewables though, so still seems like a reason to think renewables are a positive?

        It’s 100% untrue that Germany’s recent pursuing of renewables is the reason it pollutes so much per KW.

        Then France has a similar amount of renewables to the UK but with a much cleaner mix after that (basically more nuclear and less gas).

        I’m wondering if I’ve misunderstood your initial point because I’m not seeing any reason to suggest increasing renewables doesn’t reduce emissions? Only that there’s more to CO2 per KW than just categorising stuff as “renewable” vs “non-renewable”, which I don’t think anyone is doubting?

        Sorry to go so hard on this, but this stuff really matters. We don’t have a lot of time left to reduce the most extreme impacts of global warming, and nobody benefits from muddying the waters on the clear benefits of renewables.