Hmm. I have difficulty believing this. I mean it could be with current infrastructure (though I would like to see evidence to support this), but I do not see this having validity if industry was free to make it not so.
Electricity can be made virtually pollution free. For example, hydroelectric generators and grid battery storage (depending on the battery type) is almost pollution free once constructed. If we put into place reasonable solar panel recycling infrastructure, the same could be said for home solar panels.
Most things we have are designed to fail and recycling infrastructure is designed to be inefficient. Pollution in that industry is imo a choice made by the PTB to push the climate fiasco. That is why pollution is high.
If we built things like we use to (they don't make 'em like they used to isn't just a meme), we could do electricity pretty efficiently at super low pollution.
Regardless, the CO2 thing isn't really pollution. Its all the other shit that's the problem. Pollution is real, Its CO2 based climate change that has very poor supporting evidence.
Solar panels and wind turbines are negative returns on energy and extremely heavy polluters.. You need a boatload of fossil fuels to have the machinery and manufacturing in place to create them.
Once drilled, oil and gas wells are extremely low-pollution, even with all of the tailpipe emissions at the other end of the supply chain.
The only energy source that is CO2 free is nuclear and radiation-based generation. But this was made ridiculously difficult to use or construct just before the war on fossil fuels (e.g. global warming) began.
The poor eroi, you should look at something like Weissbach 2013. It estimates 7 as the eroi needed to maintain society and gives solar and wind below that amount.
Others have worked to give their own estimates, saying that society only needs a 2-6, or that solar is actually 10-15. You can find what suits your tastes in research.
Wait until people realise that on average, pollution per unit of energy of electricity is far higher than pollution per unit of gas.
Hmm. I have difficulty believing this. I mean it could be with current infrastructure (though I would like to see evidence to support this), but I do not see this having validity if industry was free to make it not so.
Electricity can be made virtually pollution free. For example, hydroelectric generators and grid battery storage (depending on the battery type) is almost pollution free once constructed. If we put into place reasonable solar panel recycling infrastructure, the same could be said for home solar panels.
Most things we have are designed to fail and recycling infrastructure is designed to be inefficient. Pollution in that industry is imo a choice made by the PTB to push the climate fiasco. That is why pollution is high.
If we built things like we use to (they don't make 'em like they used to isn't just a meme), we could do electricity pretty efficiently at super low pollution.
Regardless, the CO2 thing isn't really pollution. Its all the other shit that's the problem. Pollution is real, Its CO2 based climate change that has very poor supporting evidence.
Solar panels and wind turbines are negative returns on energy and extremely heavy polluters.. You need a boatload of fossil fuels to have the machinery and manufacturing in place to create them.
Once drilled, oil and gas wells are extremely low-pollution, even with all of the tailpipe emissions at the other end of the supply chain.
The only energy source that is CO2 free is nuclear and radiation-based generation. But this was made ridiculously difficult to use or construct just before the war on fossil fuels (e.g. global warming) began.
Im interested in your credible sources on your first point! I could use really use it when debating Libtards
That solar panels are pollution intensive? Almost anywhere. Here's a leftist source complaining about it: https://fee.org/articles/solar-panels-produce-tons-of-toxic-waste-literally/
The poor eroi, you should look at something like Weissbach 2013. It estimates 7 as the eroi needed to maintain society and gives solar and wind below that amount.
Others have worked to give their own estimates, saying that society only needs a 2-6, or that solar is actually 10-15. You can find what suits your tastes in research.