Live data from Hacker News

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

arstechnica.com

21–30 of 155 posts

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

#21

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.

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.

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

#22

This is so unacceptable. Build as many data centers as you want, but fossil fuels NEED to stop yesterday.

Imagine that you need to explain to a type II alien that your species still burns things.

Imagine they got here without burning anything, ever, in the history of their species.

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

#23
post #14

This is so unacceptable. Build as many data centers as you want, but fossil fuels NEED to stop yesterday.

This is, putting it gently, not a majority opinion in the US and especially not in Texas.

> This is, putting it gently, not a majority opinion in the US and especially not in Texas.

Texas is the largest producer of renewable energy in the country.

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

#24

It seems strange for this article to word this as a new or unusual source of pollution, natural gas is the primary source of energy in the US, adding 10% to existing thermal fleet in ERCOT https://www.ercot.com/gridmktinfo/dashboards is not a huge deal and its disingenuous to say this one plant will become a "top source of US pollution". Solar generation buildout in ERCOT is also proceeding very quickly, the new Tesl…

I'm so old I can remember when ars technica published actual technical content.

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

#25
post #23
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is, putting it gently, not a majority opinion in the US and especially not in Texas.

> This is, putting it gently, not a majority opinion in the US and especially not in Texas. Texas is the largest producer of renewable energy in the country.

Yes, because they have open permitting and encourage development. But they are also the largest producers of fossil fuels in the country.

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

#26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine that you need to explain to a type II alien that your species still burns things.

I think they'd give you some leeway if you fired up gas plants to not freeze in the winter, I want to see their faces when you tell them you turned them on because you wanted to generate more digital slop during a climate crisis

Who were you able to entertain with that "digital slop", and how many father's did you disappoint with it?

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

#27
post #21

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.

Deaths per terawatt-hour of nuclear is still lower than any fossil fuel per https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-p...

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

#28
post #21

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 will solve it. That's called fusion.

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

#29
post #21

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.

Nuclear material literally came out of the ground...m you can put it back..we have literally infinite amount of rock under us
Post reply on HN