gandalf_der_12te
yes, and more importantly, normal Hydro plants could be updated to release water at selected times, to create "on-demand power". The energy is stored in the water behind the dam. So conventional, already-existing hydro dams can perform a two-sided function: Storing water, and to release it on-demand. Like a battery that is refilled by nature.
My idea is that most Hydro-Power plants can be used as reservoirs with little modification.
And biomass can be burned at whatever moment you like (provided you have the plants to do so), so it is "on-demand power" in some sense.
I guess you should do what makes most sense to you.
There is no such moral obligation as to "have children" or "don't have children". The choice should be yours.
"TOTAL LACK OF RESPECT for the Earth and the secrets that lie beneath the surface" had me for a moment. great comedy, lol
- non-urgent computing (AI training)
- non-urgent transports (i.e. construction material)
- steel, aluminum production
The thing I heard is that geothermal energy is actually only renewable on geological timescales, i.e. not really "renewable". It's just that there are very large reserves, so it's not immediately obvious. But I can't find a link rn.
It's a conundrum, because while biofuels are expensive, there are ways to make them significantly cheaper, for example refining organic garbage and waste into fuels.
actually, that's not true. I built a hobby-grade hydrolysis machine in my garage for a total of $3. I can't imagine hydrolysis machines to be significantly expensive in general.
The reason why they're expensive today is because they're completely over-engineered. But that's not physics' fault. It's just someone seeking the "highest-quality product" instead of one that makes economic sense.
Just informing you: You can see the power output of PV panels by looking at the Watt number. It says something like 400 Wp (Watt peak - i.e. Watt under direct sunlight). Voltage is more or less irrelevant.
Source: https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/
Productivity has already gone up, now it's time for compensation to catch up.
Actually, I had a discussion about this with someone who really knows this stuff recently, and we figured that the inversion process isn't actually that inefficient. The efficiencies achieved are often >95%, so there isn't actually a lot of loss.