357
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by alphacyberranger@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Womble@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

if you want to be like that nothing is. Solar requires vast amounts of rare earths to be mined and wind requires huge amount of unrecylable blades and generators to be produced. On total lifecyle damage to the environment all three are very low but non zero.

Solar requires vast amounts of rare earths to be mined

Not true, the newest solar panels don't need rare earths at that scale.

and wind requires huge amount of unrecylable blades and generators to be produced.

Both are recyclable and even if they were not they are not radioactive, poisonous or otherwise hazardous... The blades are from a Artificial resin And glas fiber and the generators are from normal industrial materials like iron aluminum and copper.

Over all actual renewables are much more environmentally friendly and have less emissions. But yes they are also not absolutely zero emission (even though that being possible)

[-] Womble@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

these things are easy to look up, eg this is from the ipcc https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CO2_Emissions_from_Electricity_Production_IPCC.png nuclear is on a par or better than most renewable sources.

This data is old as hell... Especially regarding technology that changes twice a year...

[-] Womble@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Data isnt milk, it doesnt go bad just because its old. This was on the front of a well maintained wiki article and is from a credible source. If you have more recent data from a credible source showing something fundamentally different please share it.

[-] schroedingershat@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Because renewables don't change at all in a decade, and the ever-decreasing quality of uranium ore doesn't involve higher emissions than the benchmark of ranger and cigar lake from 2014. /s

[-] schroedingershat@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Solar requires 0 rare earths, troll.

[-] Womble@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago

Huh, i thought they did require rare earths in construction, but apparently not. They do require silicon wafers boron and phosporus, and small instalations typically come with large li-ion bateries which clearly do require lithium. But the panels themselves dont. Still my point stand that ANY method of generation requires industrial activity which has downsides, pretending nuear is unique in this is dishonest.

Please dont call people trolls just because you disagree with them, this isnt reddit.

[-] schroedingershat@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Lithiun is also not a rare earth, and is not required (doubly so in sweden). Even if you do choose to use it, you need it in significantly smaller quantities than uranium, and mining it is significantly lower impact.

The mining impact of PV and onshore wind is acceptably small (although should still be reduced further), the orders of magnitude worse impact of digging up or leeching uranium ore with lower energy density than coal, poisoning indiginous communities with the milling waste and then never cleaning it up is not.

You're sharing praeger U propaganda talking points. This is trolling.

[-] Aesthesiaphilia@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

iirc earlier solar panel construction required rare earths

In the last 10-15 years they've moved to more abundant materials

this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
357 points (94.7% liked)

World News

39019 readers
2251 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS