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

Amazon backs power plant that may become top source of US climate pollution

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–148 of 148 posts

Re: Amazon backs power plant that may become top source of US climate pollution

#141

Post by rickydroll »

reilly3000 wrote: post #76
throwaway473825 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While a good point, it also creates lock-in effects. If you look at the top EV adopters, they barely use gas power. This likely isn't a coincidence. Now you will have the AI lobby pushing against EVs (so that oil drilling can create gas as a byproduct), as if it wasn't already an uphill battle in the US...

I suppose EVs are putting pressure on their precious grid.

Worse, EVs start demand destruction for gasoline, which makes the other fractions from the refining process more expensive because gasoline is now a waste product. Or so the crayon chart on the restaurant placemat seems to indicate.

Re: Amazon backs power plant that may become top source of US climate pollution

#142

Post by Timon3 »

cloudie78 wrote: post #17

If only we had the technology and ability to produce enormous quantities of energy non-stop 24/7 365, no matter day or night wind or no wind.

24/7 365 - unless it gets warm, of course. Luckily that's not going to be- oh no

Re: Amazon backs power plant that may become top source of US climate pollution

#143

Post by throwitaway222 »

shafyy wrote: post #21
throwitaway222 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BUT NUKES! All jokes aside, yes, we should invest massively in nuclear.

No we shouldn't. Nuclear waste is not and will never be solved. Nuclear meltdowns are real. Also, nuclear is more expensive than wind and solar.

We absolutely should invest in nuclear. We won't have enough with solar anymore. AI and EVs alone have blown our projections off by 1000x at this point. Can't put the genie back in the bottle either.

I'm not saying there are no risks, but if we don't start making more nuclear power companies, Elon will and he will go from $1T to $8T. Who am I kidding, he's probably the only one that can turn them around in 2yrs with nextgen tech. Everyone else is going to keep faking it and build them in 20 years for 100x budget.

Re: Amazon backs power plant that may become top source of US climate pollution

#144

Post by perpetuallunch »

dburkland wrote: post #112
VohuMana wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But doesn’t China have the largest rollout of solar in the world?

Maybe we should be looking inward as to why solar isn't more easily deployable in the US. Local zoning, permitting, and community opposition are some of the top road blocks there...

Solar needs to address its dispatchability problem before it becomes viable as anything other than a vanity project.

Australia is experiencing this problem now to a limited extent, and is walking in to a disaster scenario with the scheduled shutdown of 5 gigawatts of coal fired electricity generating across three sites over the next three years with nothing in the pipeline to replace that 5GW.

Re: Amazon backs power plant that may become top source of US climate pollution

#145

Post by roughly »

trhway wrote: post #65
roughly wrote: post #59

But just think, when the climate collapses and we can’t go outside anymore for large portions of the year, we’re gonna be Really happy we’ve got all this AI slop to keep us entertained!

we'll have cyber-organic bodies by that time which will do fine in the acid rain in 50 C heat with 100 mph light breeze.

The flesh was weak, we have transcended the flesh

Re: Amazon backs power plant that may become top source of US climate pollution

#146

Post by jahnu »

Lerc wrote: post #108
VohuMana wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But doesn’t China have the largest rollout of solar in the world?

I believe so, They have also increased their coal consumption. The #1 increase in world electricity demand is people rising out of poverty. China has been producing the most solar in the world and still hasn't been able to cover their own demand increase with it. Eventually that form of growth will slow down. Sustainability should always look at the second derivative.

It’s worth pointing out that already last year while China’s coal power capacity grew their actual power production from coal fell.

Also need to reduce use of coal in steel production too, yet.

Re: Amazon backs power plant that may become top source of US climate pollution

#147

Post by Lerc »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #128
Lerc wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because without enough information to truly place it in context, you may be focusing on something that may not have a notable impact on the overall problem. For starters, why focus on the plant being built when it has been permitted. If you focused on the permitting process presumably you could prevent many instances simultaneously.

Regardless, we expect better from our corporate overlords.

I think, much of the problem is we do not expect better.

For every person asking a company to do the right thing there seems to be a dozen who will say there's no point and how dare you even talk to them.

I don't think that represents the majority of people. I think, in general, people see the toxicity of the debate and decide to just keep their heads down.

Re: Amazon backs power plant that may become top source of US climate pollution

#148

Post by hocuspocus »

teravor wrote: post #139
hocuspocus wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't even need that. Fast breeder reactors are enough.

while at it you might as well argue for highly enriched fuel for compact SMRs. the politics of the threat of proliferation kills it in the crib.

I'm fine with this, recent geopolitical events showed that proliferation might have deterred the world's biggest bullies.
Post reply on HN