/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #14357181

630KiB, 845x585, BD8D8671-919C-479B-A984-C300FB174A1F.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Lack of Fossil Fuels

Anonymous Sat 02 Apr 06:48:56 2022 No.14357181 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>14357224 >>14357227 >>14357889

How do we cope if fossil fuels take too long to come back and we are reduced to late 1600s-era technology? Would we be better off this way in terms of lessening the effects of dysgenics?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 02 Apr 2022 07:20:48 No.14357224 Report

Quoted By:

>>14357181
No, what happens in that scenario is niggers just slaughter everyone else because they outnumber them by so much, so first they just kill and rape their way through Europe, Asians butcher themselves like how they did in China for thousands of years and then the population of a few billion gigaretards just collapses and dies

Geo

Geo Sat 02 Apr 2022 07:25:38 No.14357227 Report

Quoted By:

>>14357181
Salt pulse...

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO PosterSolarSimple.jpg, 881KiB, 2500x1515

Anonymous Sat 02 Apr 2022 07:31:58 No.14357236 Report

Quoted By: >>14357241 >>14357252

If only there were some source of energy that was effectively limitless and could power our civilization thousands of times over. Oh well... It's not like there's a giant ball of fire in the sky that never goes out...

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 02 Apr 2022 07:38:11 No.14357241 Report

Quoted By:

>>14357236
It's amazing to me that Australia still hasn't capitalised on its massive uninhabited desert areas by mass building solar panels to make an absolute killing in the green energy sector.
Literally some of the best real estate for renewables in the world and they can't pull their finger out and get it done.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 02 Apr 2022 07:46:44 No.14357252 Report

Quoted By: >>14357290

>>14357236
Solar panels degrade so you'll need to replace them about every 20 years. The energy density is also very similar to farming, which is not conducive for radically improving wealth per capita. People also like to use energy at night so you'll need serious battery installations in conjunction, which degrade quickly too.

Baseload power is the most effective and reliable strategy, which means nuclear if you care about greenhouse gases.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO sustainability-13-07846-g001-550.jpg, 35KiB, 550x281

Anonymous Sat 02 Apr 2022 08:25:44 No.14357290 Report

Quoted By:

>>14357252
20 years is an underestimate. The industry standard is 25-30 years and there are people who still have their panels after 50+ years. They don't degrade nearly as much as you probably think either. They lose about 0.5% of their rating each year, so they only lose 15% of their energy production over their lifetime. As a bonus the production, recycling, and replacement of solar panels guarantees jobs in proportion to our energy needs. Furthermore, multipurposed land can greatly reduce the land area devoted to power production, and some applications like agrivoltaics (pic related) can increase the efficiency and lifespan of solar panels by keeping them cool.

Nuclear is not an unlimited resource and in my opinion we should save it for space missions.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 02 Apr 2022 14:36:19 No.14357889 Report

Quoted By:

>>14357181
The premise of your question is wrong. We have plenty of coal and the Fischer-Tropsch process has been known for about 100 years and will let you turn coal into liquid fuel.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches