/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>50880970
>Renewables are a joke which basically just forces you to build more normal power to support it, but nuclear obsoletes everything else for the most part and that's why it's a threat.
This is very true if your climate geography is bad for renewables. On the other hand if you've got the right climate and geography their great.
IIRC I think Ft. Worth TX is set to be the first major city in the US to go green, carbon neutral, or something. Mainly because putting in panels is cheap and actually makes sense.

>>18267203
This is actually true but not for the reasons you might think.
The short answer is major oil companies gib money to help prop up the green lobby in the "correct" direction.
Let me be blunt:
ExxonMobile has never worried about Solar or Wind energy becoming viable. They will always be 20 years away in most places as they are only environmentally viable(better then fossil fuels only) in a small section of the developed world and only economically viable in an even smaller subsection of that.
Pic related.
Outside the areas shown here they are either viable but to far away from a major population center to make the investment attractive due to transport cost, viable environmentally but not viable economically, breakeven environmentally but not viable environmentally or straight up a worse for the environment worse for your checkbook option.

>Worse for the environment how
3 reasons 1) consistency or lack there of for energy production + 2) inability to store excess meaning when they are in bad conditions to produce energy fossil fuels fill in that gap in Germany they have gone to using Lignite every time solar fails them(most of the time, Germany is not a sunny country) which is basically coal but worse. 3) There is an environmental cost for the raw materials needed to build these facilities and to manufacture the solar panels/wind turbines and their batteries(and also to maintain them).


Natgas and Shale have actually done more to lower US emissions then supposed renewable by 1) replacing coal 2) replacing normal crude particularly heavy and sour blends which are worse for the environment(on Shale) 3) Natgas is more environmentally friendly then oil period.
The only two renewables that actually threaten the industry 1) Hydro(which can't be scaled up due to there only being so many rivers and that damning all of them is a mistake that destroys your river system[vital for a country] so you can only damn some of them strategically be careful) 1/?