to give a visual indication of that comparison:
ha
vs.
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Idk man solar might be better but the corn sounds a lot funnier.
I mean if you think about it, what is a corn field but a really shitty solar panel?
Solar panels dont produce fuel for thermal engines and are intermittent. In the longer term we want electric vehicles and batterie to absorb intermittence but in the short term it has its uses
Yeah, I dont think we’ll ever be in a place where we don’t want to be producing some combustible fuel. We can electrify a whole lot of things, but it’s hard to beat the energy density of stuff you can burn.
Oh I think we will get there quicker than people believe and it comes with so much advantage in terms of noise, mechanical complexity, energy efficiency, waste heat, vibrations, ease of danger, maintenance, that I think electrification is now largely a matter of cost and that energy density will be worked around as soon as the rest is affordable.
How many ha of solar panels to produce the lifetime output of a 4,000 MW Nuclear power plant? (~45 years)
Don’t compare nuclear and renewables, compare both to fossil fuels and greenwashing garbage like biomass and bio ethanol.
Is bio ethanol bad?
From wikipedia:
Figures compiled in a 2007 report by National Geographic[70] point to modest results for corn ethanol produced in the US: one unit of fossil-fuel energy is required to create 1.3 energy units from the resulting ethanol
Add on top of that the environmental impact and opportunity cost of the land use, and corn based ethanol becomes a non-viable solution.
