DerGottesknecht

Yeah, you were rightfully downvoted. You came in here, posted a video with a provocative question and expected other people to spend their time on it. Thats pretty entitled. Also you were combative all around, so most peoples initial opinion was negative. Your try for more appeal to the video just fell flat. If you want to spread this, include a tldr and don’t use phrases like blue q anon or whatever it was

But you always have a combination of several renewable sources which can power these countries.

this is not uncontested, plenty of people disagree

Yeah, i know. Time will tell.

we have been saying this for decades and I guarantee you we will still be saying in in another decade. Also, renewables aren’t fast to connect to the grid either. The more we spin up the bigger the backlog will be connecting new installations to the grid.

Sorry but that is just not true. The growth of solar has almost been logarithmic and the installed capacity was almost non-existent two decades ago. That just doesn’t compare to the snails pace of nuclear.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_photovoltaics

Also, it’s not about people, but money. Every euro spent on some tech bro nuclear startup could be used to install real capacity instead.

longer power lines means more efficiency losses, and the more you plan to roll out renewables to 100% the more inefficiencies there will be. as previously stated, connecting large brand new renewable installations to the grid is expensive and also takes a long time.

Yeah, theoretically true, but what distances are we talking about? To get electricity from the suburbs in the city center should be trivial. It gets more difficult if we have to cross countries, but high voltage DC solves that issue pretty well. We could power europe from solar installed in the Sahara ^^

And it became really relevant only recently with the takeover of the us by trump, the couchfucker, musk and peter thiel. Before that it was mainly just wet libertarian dreams.

Don’t forget hydro, look at Norway, it’s pretty far away from the equator but has almost 100% renewables. Island as well. There are suboptimal locations, but in the end there is no country which can’t use renewables for all electricity needs.

Supplying the current global electricity consumption with solar PV would imply covering 0.3% of the land area of the world (source)

All rooftops should be enough but parking lots and agrarsolar would be also solutions. So even if we only use solar (which we don’t ) it should be possible.

Renewables create a base load, the problem are demand peaks following overcast days. And there npps don’t help.

so would nuclear if we actually did it and improved regulatory inefficiencies

Maybe, but not fast enough. We need the power immediately and battery are already in the steep part of their growth phase. We can’t spend several decades learning how to do it right. Then we could also just wait for fusion.

land use isn’t an issue in rural places, but it absolutely is in more densely populated places near cities and datacenter hubs. The world is not homogenous.

Then we use power lines like we do already. Most power plants right now are also not in cities, so I don’t understand the argument. Would you also want to build the npps in/near cities?

But the technology requires this amount of bureaucracy, else you get big problems. I trust physics, but i don’t trust humans. Especially if they can get money by skimping on security. The risks with renawables (except dams) are way smaller.

Where do renewables not work? I’d say they work at even more places, because you don’t need such a developed infrastructure to set it up. Everyone can wire up a small solar farm after a few hours of YouTube, i wouldn’t trust myself with reactor maintenance.

Nuclear also needs storage for peaks. You don’t want to have to build enough nuclear for peak production which then gets shut down all the time, driving up your LCOE. You want your expensive plant to run all the time. Also you need storage if you have an unplanned maintenance, because then you lose a relevant percentage of production with little to no warning.

And storage is getting cheaper and better every year. The bigger issue would be a grid that can shovel power from one end of a continent to the other in case of adverse weather.

We need less space for solar to power the world than we use for golf courses right now, so I’d say landuse is a non issue. Because you can use roofs and such even less.

It also was covered recently in the podcast “behind the bastards”.

Don’t forget that most newspapers are owned by the capitalist class and journalists can’t always write about what they want. Should be absolutely more, but eh, what can we do? It’s a complex thema and most people aren’t going to be interested. Just radicalize your friends and over time maybe we see a shift in the public reception

I mean it gets picked up by msm:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/21/curtis-yarvin-trump

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/magazine/curtis-yarvin-interview.html

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/curtis-yarvin/

Renewables + Storage + Grid.

Yeah, I don’t think it’s good to sink so much money in this, we could build more renewables instead. But you’re right, we will see

But the issue is, it’s too expensive to build. And the small reactor startup project is also not producing power and seems to be built on hype

Ne, das war Joseph Smith. Hier gibts ne gute Doku wie sich das zugetragen hat

France auditors recently put out a report in which they criticized the high cost of their nuclear program and requested a moratorium for new projects in other countries.

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/france-far-ready-build-six-new-nuclear-reactors-auditor-says-2025-01-14/

If we take this as argument all ukrainians are fascists, then those guys should proof all ukrainians are LGBT.

But maybe there are just all kinds of ukrainians fighting together against Russia?

I don’t think the flavor of fascism is that important. We in Germany also call our local fascists neonazis, which got shorted to just nazis. It’s the same ideology.

At what point can we call musk a nazi then? If he publicly recites the 14 words?

Why do you trust the ADL in this?

Yeah. Why would hunter pick this shop, which owner is conveniently blind and then not pick it back up? And then the data gets send to rudy Giuliani? I mean come on.

The mails are most likely real, as verified by several sources so the point is moot, but in the end don’t proof any corruption by biden with burisma. But I’m done talking with you, I only wanted to correct you on the gun charges and this conversation ceased to amuse me. You americans are fucked anyway, i’m only sad for all the people who voted to keep democracy. Bye

Wikipedia is one of if not the most trustworthy source of facts on the Internet. Nothing beats nerds who want to proof other nerds wrong. And especially in such high profile cases, changes by governments don’t stay if they are wrong.

They confirmed the emails are authentic, not the laptop. The source your article cites does not confirm this.

Yes, but: Hunter Biden has never claimed the laptop was his, and the lawsuit also does not say he dropped the laptop off at Mac Isaac’s store.

So where does the fbi really confirm that it’s hunters laptop?

Your links only confirm that the principle of wikipedia works, despite attempts to manipulate articles they get reverted and the manipulation is discovered.

And sorry, but if you don’t trust Wikipedia, why trust the nyp with a factual reliability of medium and a right wing bias?

Wikipedia is a big tech company? Wikipedia known for collaboration with government?

Emails which were found by a blind guy, got lost by rudy Giuliani and were most likely obtained by russian hackers?

Give me some sources for your claims or take your tinfoil hat and get lost.