92
submitted 9 months ago by Womble@lemmy.world to c/climate@slrpnk.net
all 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 57 points 9 months ago

It's worth noting that the actual volumes of non-recyclable material left when we're done with solar panels are tiny compared with the huge ponds of toxic ash left by coal.

[-] Womble@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Sure, I don't think anyone discussing energy production in good faith would claim that coal is anything other than the absolute worst. It's not exactly a huge achievement to say something is less bad than the most polluting method of energy generation in existence.

[-] silence7@slrpnk.net 19 points 9 months ago
[-] Womble@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

Right, but that doesnt mean they're perfect and their flaws shouldnt be discussed, if for no other reason than to ensure it doesnt become a bigger problem in the future.

In addition to the waste problem the article also talks about the world supply of silver being exhausted in ~20 years if solar continues to expand at the expected 5-10x. That sounds like a problem, its probably fixable by shifting to new designs but it needs to be considered and work put into that in order to do so.

[-] blazera@lemmy.world 39 points 9 months ago

so a product with decades long lifetime made almost entirely out of easily and commonly recycled parts like aluminum and glass, vs fuels with lifetimes of a few seconds with zero recyclability, all of the waste is immediately mixed into the air. Fuck off fossil fuel pawns.

[-] Womble@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago

What's with the hostility? No one is disputing that solar in Australia is obviously a good choice and far better than fossil fuels. But that doesnt mean the (relatively small) downsides shouldn't be discussed.

this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2024
92 points (100.0% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5493 readers
228 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS