Unfounded concerns about photovoltaic toxicity and waste slowing decarbonization • Hacker News Board

Re: Unfounded concerns about photovoltaic toxicity and waste slowing decarbonization

#51

Post by svnt » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 10:01 AM UTC

hannob wrote: post #8

Gasp0de wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because some people make billions by utilizing or selling "free" energy from fossil fuels? Companies extract these, they often don't pay for the energy (just the cost of extraction) and can sell them at huge profits. The cost of pollution is then also not paid by them.

That is certainly true, but it's not a full explanation. I recently was at an information event from our local electricity provider about wind energy projects. And there are those people... There was a conversation going on like: "The people I talked to don't want these things." Event moderator: "What are the reasons?" Guy: "They simply don't want them." And I am pretty sure that was no fossil fuel lobbyist. It was j…

I think it is mostly a confusion of identity.

We are used to the people pushing against technological progress being someone other than older and somewhat tech-capable men.

These people have been holding out and formed their arguments back when they first learned about renewables, which was twenty or more years ago. Technology has continued to progress but their positions ossified early.

Now that the future they denied is here we are seeing vanilla guilt-backed rationalizing. We just aren’t used to seeing it from these guys because they were always excited back when technological progress generally proved them right.

Re: Unfounded concerns about photovoltaic toxicity and waste slowing decarbonization

#52

Post by throwaway60742 » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 10:01 AM UTC

kemotep wrote: post #49

throwaway60742 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does "full solar lifecycle emissions" include the gas and coal powerplant you use because you couldn't build energy storage and your electric grid can't handle the peak power? Does it include the reconstruction of the grid it necessitated?

Are you saying that if we don’t build solar panels, we won’t have to use electricity generated by gas and coal?

Yes, because instead of wind/solar+storage+grid capable of handling the peaks, we would be building nuclear. Using much less concrete and much less diesel for construction trucks.

Re: Unfounded concerns about photovoltaic toxicity and waste slowing decarbonization

#53

Post by hef19898 » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 10:03 AM UTC

rob74 wrote: post #30

mathieuh wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's become a culture war issue. In the UK London introduced a so-called Ultra-Low Emissions Zone recently, and Wales has dropped 30 mph speed limits down to 20, which prompted the right-wing populist government to come out as being "on the side of drivers" and to call decarbonisation schemes "tyrannical". They've now gone full swivel-eyed loon and are rowing back many climate change commitments. It seems to me that,…

It's the same here too... before the recent state-level elections here in Bavaria is was basically "everyone against the Green party", the right-wing government (CSU and Freie Wähler) trying to out-populist the far-right populists from the AfD while trying to not sound too much like them - with the result that the AfD gained 4.4 % points compared to the last elections, FW gained 4,2%, CSU lost 0,2% (looks like they w…

And basically all because of how we shoupd be heating our homes in the future. Quite pathetic actually, but every time I am in the more rural areas of Bavaria (a state I love, I am one of those with a healthy amount of regional partiotism of the absolute not serious kind), I remember the days of my youth: Without FW and AfD, all those opinions (from anti-semitic borderline hate speech to blatant racism and sexism, the pursuitbof short term profits regardless of costs, the disregard for nature if a dime could be made...) all existed to the same extent, they were only covered, and welcome, by the CSU as it was. Lately, there is split happeneing, were those more radical elements are drifting a bit further right. The same happened to the SPD when Lafontaine split of Die Linke after his fall-out with Schröder.

The next federal elections will be "fun", I just hope us Germans, as a whole, do the same thing that happened across Europe lately: prevent the more extremenright from getting the power of government (I know the post-fasiscts won in Italy).

That being said, I do think that most of the pro-AfD votes come from people deeply affraid of the change they see happening, affraid that someone will take away things from them. Not that this is the case, but it sure seems like it sometimes (I can see it myself). Unless a true pro-democratic coalition forms (explicitly incl. media), we will be stuck in this situation for the time being.

Re: Unfounded concerns about photovoltaic toxicity and waste slowing decarbonization

#54

Post by pydry » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 10:03 AM UTC

hannob wrote: post #8

Gasp0de wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because some people make billions by utilizing or selling "free" energy from fossil fuels? Companies extract these, they often don't pay for the energy (just the cost of extraction) and can sell them at huge profits. The cost of pollution is then also not paid by them.

That is certainly true, but it's not a full explanation. I recently was at an information event from our local electricity provider about wind energy projects. And there are those people... There was a conversation going on like: "The people I talked to don't want these things." Event moderator: "What are the reasons?" Guy: "They simply don't want them." And I am pretty sure that was no fossil fuel lobbyist. It was j…

>And I am pretty sure that was no fossil fuel lobbyist. It was just a guy who is against things. And there are plenty of those.

That's how all propaganda functions. Fossil fuel/nuclear lobbyists pump ideas into the heads of the easily duped via mass media at a range of different intellectual levels and then the readers will absorb it like it was their own idea and echo it back.

The only difference between the upper and the lower intellectual levels of propaganda is that the upper level of propaganda might rely more on logical consistency, misdirection and attempts to make the reader feel smart while the lower levels will rely more on repetition of a simple message.

Re: Unfounded concerns about photovoltaic toxicity and waste slowing decarbonization

#55

Post by hef19898 » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 10:04 AM UTC

littlestymaar wrote: post #7

weevil wrote: post #3

I'm honestly at a loss as to why some people (and organizations) are hell-bent on hampering attempts to decarbonize, and amplifying whatever tiny negatives they can whether they're real or not, as though nothing less than 100% perfect is worth replacing the awful status quo.

I'll bite: the problem is that renewable in itself doesn't mean decarbonation: if you're importing solar panels built with Chinese coal and deploy them in Europe / Northern US, you're not actually decarboning anything, and instead you're increasing the carbon footprint but move it abroad. So there are things that are not just “not perfect” but actually harmful, and you can't just blindly deploy “not perfect” things.…

You zave no idea about energy consumption along a supply chain, if you actually believe any of this.

Re: Unfounded concerns about photovoltaic toxicity and waste slowing decarbonization

#56

Post by orwell_bruh » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 10:06 AM UTC

svnt wrote: post #43

orwell_bruh wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I did see CO2 as a problem I'd still be against wind and solar and all the other harebrained schemes that are mathematically proven to be unable to even make a dent in climate change. However, they are guranteed to lower our standard of living substantially. And a prediction that you'll be able to observe in the coming decades: a lot of those "minor" and "invented" concerns will be front and center once we all hav…

Let it out. Let the last pieces of your clinging to an identity in crude oil products fall away. Gaia still loves you. Hydrocarbon technology never cared in the first place. No one blames you for being deceived.

Yes, I identify as someone with reliable heating and power who eats real food, has many children and like to go on vacation from time to time.

Btw, it's not me being deceived but eventually you'll figure that out, I am sure.

Re: Unfounded concerns about photovoltaic toxicity and waste slowing decarbonization

#57

Post by svnt » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 10:06 AM UTC

throwaway60742 wrote: post #42

kjksf wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's the reason then those people are misinformed. Coal and gas plants are closing because they cannot compete on price with solar/wind + battery storage. The cost advantage is not true everywhere but the future is clear. Coal and gas will not become cheaper. Solar and wind is most expensive today it'll ever be. Storage in particular is so early in the cycle that we can expect the cost will drop at least in half…

No way they are misinformed, look at German power mix. Germany - the most vocal proponents of wind/solar - is the most polluting country in the whole EU. > Coal and gas plants are closing because they cannot compete on price with solar/wind + battery storage. That did not happen anywhere in Europe. New gas plants are being constructed right now, and coal powerplants had to be restarted when Germans dropped nuclear. >…

Germany’s repeated renewables efforts were long subject to the fact that Germany was Russia’s European project to keep fossil fuels going as long as possible.

No other European country with as much technical competence has inexplicably failed so hard at renewables over and over.

Now Germany is experiencing a transition in market conditions that is uncomfortably quick.

Re: Unfounded concerns about photovoltaic toxicity and waste slowing decarbonization

#58

Post by hef19898 » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 10:07 AM UTC

throwaway60742 wrote: post #52

kemotep wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that if we don’t build solar panels, we won’t have to use electricity generated by gas and coal?

Yes, because instead of wind/solar+storage+grid capable of handling the peaks, we would be building nuclear. Using much less concrete and much less diesel for construction trucks.

You actually believe, that producing a solar panel, transporting it to the installation site on the other side of the planet, and maintaining it consumes more energy than the module will produce? Where do you get your numbers from, the back of a cereal box bought from Wish?

Re: Unfounded concerns about photovoltaic toxicity and waste slowing decarbonization

#59

Post by bondant » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 10:07 AM UTC

throwaway60742 wrote: post #42

kjksf wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's the reason then those people are misinformed. Coal and gas plants are closing because they cannot compete on price with solar/wind + battery storage. The cost advantage is not true everywhere but the future is clear. Coal and gas will not become cheaper. Solar and wind is most expensive today it'll ever be. Storage in particular is so early in the cycle that we can expect the cost will drop at least in half…

No way they are misinformed, look at German power mix. Germany - the most vocal proponents of wind/solar - is the most polluting country in the whole EU. > Coal and gas plants are closing because they cannot compete on price with solar/wind + battery storage. That did not happen anywhere in Europe. New gas plants are being constructed right now, and coal powerplants had to be restarted when Germans dropped nuclear. >…

> Germany - the most vocal proponents of wind/solar - is the most polluting country in the whole EU.

Are they? Looks like it's Poland who is generating the most CO2 for electricity production.

https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/co2-emission-i...

Re: Unfounded concerns about photovoltaic toxicity and waste slowing decarbonization

#60

Post by svnt » Tue, Oct 17, 2023, 10:08 AM UTC

throwaway60742 wrote: post #37

unglaublich wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People pay billions in subsidies for the fossil fuel industry, so we can just move those and leave taxes as they are.

Not everyone does. Maybe people in the US, but most EU countries don't have any fossil fuel industry to subsidize. Where I live people are against solar/wind because they want to go nuclear.

Where you live you are subject to disinformation and nuclear is the last effort of delay and distraction.

You could put up massive solar and wind farms next year. How long would it be until sufficient nuclear capacity came online?