Conversation

"Carbon capture" is clearly nonsense. Solar is clearly not.

2
2
0

People championing nuclear are also lost in the weeds of basic math. Nuclear energy costs between $0.45 and $0.60 per kilowatt-hour, and that's only in fuel costs; it doesn't include the cost $5b-$10b best case for a five-year-minimum reactor buildout.

If you want the $0.08 to $0.15 energy solar provides, you can have huge installations for a few million in months, and home installations for thousands in weeks.

https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power

https://solarcalculatorcanada.org/solar-panel-cost-canada

https://liberalandlovingit.substack.com/p/cost-analysis-of-a-nuclear-power

1
0
0

The reason all of this continues to be interesting to me is that solar power fundamentally changes the power dynamics of the state.

The classic definition of The State is an organization with a monopoly on the use of violence within its borders. A societal dependency on supply chains - the power grid, the oil industry - that can be cut off at will is one of and maybe the foremost levers of that violence, more so than police or the military.

Solar+batteries changes that entire relationship.

1
0
0
I don't know why you are phrasing this like the state won't use violence to maintain control of energy supply chains
0
0
1
@mhoye someone really hates solar against all reason lmao
0
0
1