Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Every Day 10k People Die Due to Air Pollution from Fossil Fuels

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 72 posts

Re: Every Day 10k People Die Due to Air Pollution from Fossil Fuels

#61

Post by ekianjo »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #50
ekianjo wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There’s no free lunch. It came with side effects. Yes, and it's largely positive since we have a much larger population that can actually survive thanks to the benefits across the board that fossil fuels have brought (mobility, agriculture, commerce, etc...). To reduce their negative side effects the first thing would be to get away from coal.

For now. If it's not sustainable for more than a few centuries then our offspring are in for a rude awakening.

> For now. If it's not sustainable for more than a few centuries then our offspring are in for a rude awakening.

Typically you don't make plans for the future by assuming nothing ever improves.

Re: Every Day 10k People Die Due to Air Pollution from Fossil Fuels

#62

Post by LargoLasskhyfv »

Alex3917 wrote: post #13
vsviridov wrote: post #7

How many thousands get to not die because of use of fossil fuels? Just for perspective...

> Just for perspective... How does that give you any perspective? A huge percentage of the air pollution in NYC is from the same couple dozen buildings that were grandfathered into not needing to meet air pollution laws, as well as things like construction vehicles and cruise ships, which are completely unregulated. There is almost zero relationship between the benefits from fossil fuel use and the deaths from air po…

At least for ships there is an update:

[1] http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/PressBriefings/Pages/MEPC-...

Re: Every Day 10k People Die Due to Air Pollution from Fossil Fuels

#63

Post by LargoLasskhyfv »

jacquesm wrote: post #40
29athrowaway wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only we had a huge fusion reactor floating in the sky that gave us energy for free.

It's raining energy, and all we have are forks. It isn't all that easy to transition from a fossil fuel based economy to one that uses solar (direct) or wind (indirectly also solar). The costs are substantial (though coming down quite a bit), the logistical problems plentiful and the grid that we have today is not well suited to decentralized generation, though that too is work in progress and improving. I'm a pretty…

Maybe this could lead to better forks?

[1] https://phys.org/news/2020-08-black-silicon-photodetector-ef...

At least I wondered about how this could be applicable to mass produced solar panels when I read it. Dunno. Maybe in 20 years?

edit: [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_silicon

Re: Every Day 10k People Die Due to Air Pollution from Fossil Fuels

#65

Post by imtringued »

zdragnar wrote: post #30
Alex3917 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just for perspective... How does that give you any perspective? A huge percentage of the air pollution in NYC is from the same couple dozen buildings that were grandfathered into not needing to meet air pollution laws, as well as things like construction vehicles and cruise ships, which are completely unregulated. There is almost zero relationship between the benefits from fossil fuel use and the deaths from air po…

Fossil fuels are responsible for a majority of our current heat and electricity generation as well as logistics for medications and emergency transportation. We technically could transition, but doing so would be massively expensive (whether we went with nuclear or renewables), and some industries would simply not be cost effective or would be eliminated entirely. The consequence of that cost is the stress of financi…

Doing the sustainable thing is only expensive in the short term. Over the long term fossil fuels will cause more harm than good.

Re: Every Day 10k People Die Due to Air Pollution from Fossil Fuels

#66

Post by imtringued »

ekianjo wrote: post #60
GhostVII wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think most people can agree that up until this point, burning fossil fuels have been a net positive. But as renewables get cheaper and more useful, at some point it becomes worth it to pay the cost of renewables rather than continue to have a ~1 year reduced life expectancy. So I think the most important comparison is renewables vs fossil fuels.

> But as renewables get cheaper and more useful, at some point it becomes worth it to pay the cost of renewables rather than continue to have a ~1 year reduced life expectancy Why is nobody talking about nuclear though? The energy density of nuclear blows everything else out of the water, and so far it's been CO2 free for the most part and safer or at the same level of safety as renewables (btw there is no such thing…

Nuclear is dead because nobody is willing to pay for it. Building safe nuclear reactors is just a money thing. Disposing of waste is all about money. Decommissioning unsafe reactors is also just a matter of money.

Before you tell me that regulations are a waste of money think about the two easily preventable nuclear accidents we have already had in the past simply because the people responsible weren't willing to spend money.

Here is my advice. Build products (read reactor designs) that people are willing to buy today and you'll find lots of customers.

Re: Every Day 10k People Die Due to Air Pollution from Fossil Fuels

#67

Post by imtringued »

orangecat wrote: post #58
metta2uall wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Australia new renewables plus storage are already cheaper than new coal or nuclear. Ref: "New CSIRO, AEMO study confirms wind, solar and storage beat coal, gas and nuclear" https://reneweconomy.com.au/new-csiro-aemo-study-confirms-wi...

"New CSIRO, AEMO study confirms wind, solar and storage beat coal, gas and nuclear" I've seen stories like that for at least a decade as well. If true, then how is climate change not a solved problem? Build lots of solar and wind, decommission all coal and natural gas (and apparently nuclear), profit! Yet according to the most prominent environmentalists, we need massive new spending and regulations, and we'll have t…

The amount of curtailed energy produced by renewables is like a sad joke in Germany. It's not enough to deploy renewables, you also need to shut down the existing coal plants.

Re: Every Day 10k People Die Due to Air Pollution from Fossil Fuels

#68

Post by imtringued »

onelastjob wrote: post #24
ethanbond wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you offer some insight into why you believe this is the case? As someone in my 20s, I don’t think I know anyone who is opposed to nuclear. From my vantage it’s not clear why this would be considered a lost battle.

In my opinion, the biggest issue with nuclear energy is that you have to trust the competency of both the companies running the plants and the governments of the countries those plants exist in. The Fukushima disaster is a good example. The plant was set up to switch to backup power generators in the event of an earthquake, but those generators were located in basements that would flood in the event of a tsunami. Sin…

At that point the entire plant should have been shut down and decommissioned and a new one should have been built in its place. It would have been the one best investments in the entire history of the Japan. Fukushima is just a bottomless money pit now.

Re: Every Day 10k People Die Due to Air Pollution from Fossil Fuels

#69

Post by Alex3917 »

zdragnar wrote: post #56
taylorlunt wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You completely ignored what the person above you wrote.

Not really, I only responded to the line > There is almost zero relationship between the benefits from fossil fuel use and the deaths from air pollution due to fossil fuels. You don't actually get one without the other, and understanding the cost of the alternatives is how it is "put into perspective". The bit about NYC was largely irrelevant, imho, to the rest of the discussion, given that the issue is far larger th…

> You don't actually get one without the other, and understanding the cost of the alternatives is how it is "put into perspective".

The benefits of fossil fuels come from the energy output. The air pollution deaths come (mostly) from fine particulates. You could easily get the exact same set of benefits with like 99% fewer fine particulates.

Re: Every Day 10k People Die Due to Air Pollution from Fossil Fuels

#70

Post by bassman9000 »

metta2uall wrote: post #48
bassman9000 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's been much R&D, 4th gen coming. Third gen is ready. Public opinion is lost because of posts like yours, and it adds up in terms of costs. Millions of people dying every year from carbon burning power stations cannot wait for a 100% renewable cycle.

I really hope 4th gen succeeds since in high-population areas without much land for wind/solar it's badly needed. However the fact it's taking so long suggests there are serious challenges. For example, there is the neat idea of a fail-safe freeze-plug to stop a damaged molten salt reactor - but what happens next? The corrosive nuclear fuel needs to be safely contained for a long time or safely removed for re-process…

It's taking long because it's absolutely taboo to even discuss these topics. We're suffering a series heat wave in California, power shutdowns loom, and we're asked to turn down the AC and don't use appliances. Sacramento voted to close a nuclear power plant not that long ago.

And the same people that complain about the power outages vote against the only reliable, carbon-free energy source we have now.

Post reply on HN