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

Photos capture the breathtaking scale of China's wind and solar buildout

e360.yale.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 612 posts

Re: Photos capture the breathtaking scale of China's wind and solar buildout

#331

Post by m4ck_ »

expedition32 wrote: post #128
roxolotl wrote: post #21

It genuinely makes me so sad to see the US not doing the same. Having grown up to the constant beat of “energy independence” as the core goal of a party it seemed obvious that the nearly limitless energy that rains down from the sky would be the answer. But instead we’ve kept choosing the option which requires devastating our, and other’s around the world, community. That’s not to exclude the harsh reality of mining…

The US invented fracking. Arguably the US is energy independent. It has Texas, Canada and Venezuela. They never did discover any large oilfields in China despite decades of frantically searching for it.

We're only energy independent in the sense that we export more oil than we import. We're still reliant on foreign oil because we haven't retooled (or built enough new) refineries for a lot of the oil we produce. Allowing the Saudis to own refineries is probably a strong factor there. If the middle east and Canada cut us off, we're SOL. Venezuela barely produces anything right now.

Re: Photos capture the breathtaking scale of China's wind and solar buildout

#332

Post by epolanski »

Retric wrote: post #318
epolanski wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meanwhile in Italy, the whole renewables discussion is gaslighted by "we should actually consider nuclear" and "wind turbines ruin the panorama". I'm not against nuclear per se, but it's like this part of italians don't realize that: 1. if you decide to make a power plant today, it won't be online before the 2050s, in the best case scenario. It's very difficult to bring nuclear plants online, especially in the west.…

I’m anti nuclear on cost reasons but that’s excessively pessimistic. Nuclear can use seawater for cooling, and being colder offsets the cost premium of using salt water. Your 2050’s comment assumes a level of dysfunction that’s presumably exaggerated. Averaging 10 years puts you at 2036 and is itself somewhat pessimistic. The cost of canceled nuclear projects is generally quite low compared to lifetime subsidies of n…

> Averaging 10 years puts you at 2036 and is itself somewhat pessimistic.

The average time globally is 14 years. The latest point of reference in the west, Vogtle was announced in 2006 and came online in 2025, 19 years later. It took 7 years alone just to start building it.

There's no chance this would take less time in Italy, where you need to also find a suitable place, you don't have the know-how and there's an anti-nuclear referendum that's been voted 3 decades ago. So there is a lot that needs to be changed, starting from having a public voting.

Hinkley Point C, in UK, has ballooned it's cost from the planned 18B pounds to a 43B pounds in the span of a decade. These projects always go overbudget, badly.

Re: Photos capture the breathtaking scale of China's wind and solar buildout

#333

Post by dingnuts »

btbuildem wrote: post #162
ranguna wrote: post #4

Technological, manufacturing and energy advancements aside (congrats China on those), the pictures look beautiful. Amazing work from the photographer.

Same sentiment! The one photo from Mongolia is going as my desktop background

Are you joking? It looks just as ugly as mountaintop removal to me.

They could preserve all that scenery by just building out nuclear. That's without mentioning the horrible ecological impact of blanketing an entire ecosystem in panels.

Re: Photos capture the breathtaking scale of China's wind and solar buildout

#334

Post by matthewdgreen »

hollowturtle wrote: post #308

All I see is missed opportunities to build a bunch less nuclear power plants and call it a day, without messing up with the landscape. Am I the only one? I believe if we Europeans and Americans start building nuclear power plants again we could finally compete. Renewable energy is not constant and has a storage problem

If nuclear plants were as inexpensive as renewables, that would make a ton of sense.

Re: Photos capture the breathtaking scale of China's wind and solar buildout

#337

Post by socalgal2 »

roxolotl wrote: post #21

It genuinely makes me so sad to see the US not doing the same. Having grown up to the constant beat of “energy independence” as the core goal of a party it seemed obvious that the nearly limitless energy that rains down from the sky would be the answer. But instead we’ve kept choosing the option which requires devastating our, and other’s around the world, community. That’s not to exclude the harsh reality of mining…

Those are nice pictures but I can take the same pictures in the USA.

Note: I'm not suggesting China is not doing better here. Rather, I'm going off the title "Photos capture the breathtaking scale of China's wind and solar buildout" and I'm not seeing anything in those photos I haven't seen in the USA.

Driving down the 580 from SF to Tracy you pass several hundred windmills. Driving through Mojave the same. Also solar. Driving toward Vegas as well. And those are just the ones I've seen with my own eyes. There's many others.

https://www.google.com/search?udm=2&q=altamont+pass+windmill...

https://www.google.com/search?udm=2&q=mojave+windmills&sa=X&...

https://www.google.com/search?udm=2&q=palmdale+solar+farm&sa...

https://www.google.com/search?udm=2&q=desert+stateline+solar...

https://www.google.com/search?udm=2&q=barstow+solar+plant&sa...

Re: Photos capture the breathtaking scale of China's wind and solar buildout

#338

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

yndoendo wrote: post #321
yeureka wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently read, and recommend a book titled "Here Comes the Sun" by Bill McKibben. There's a passage where a calculation is made of the amount of minerals that have to be mined in order to build renewable energy to cover all current energy needs. This quantity is huge. However it is equivalent in mass to the amount of fossil fuels that are extracted every year. The major difference is that the equipment for renewabl…

One point that gets very little coverage is that fossil fuels are a limited resource. Once they used they are gone. The materials for renewable energy are still in a usable form.

CO2 can be converted to methane. It just isn't profitable to do so yet. After the fossil fuels are depleted, it will be a viable niche for storable energy where renewables aren't practical.

Re: Photos capture the breathtaking scale of China's wind and solar buildout

#339

Post by [deleted] »

epolanski wrote: post #332
Retric wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m anti nuclear on cost reasons but that’s excessively pessimistic. Nuclear can use seawater for cooling, and being colder offsets the cost premium of using salt water. Your 2050’s comment assumes a level of dysfunction that’s presumably exaggerated. Averaging 10 years puts you at 2036 and is itself somewhat pessimistic. The cost of canceled nuclear projects is generally quite low compared to lifetime subsidies of n…

> Averaging 10 years puts you at 2036 and is itself somewhat pessimistic. The average time globally is 14 years. The latest point of reference in the west, Vogtle was announced in 2006 and came online in 2025, 19 years later. It took 7 years alone just to start building it. There's no chance this would take less time in Italy, where you need to also find a suitable place, you don't have the know-how and there's an an…

[deleted]

Re: Photos capture the breathtaking scale of China's wind and solar buildout

#340

Post by toomuchtodo »

PilotJeff wrote: post #324

We are so done, and are going to be forced to instead fight the rest of the world for the remaining oil left if we don’t wake up. It may even be too late.

Worry not, you can't change the US but you can leave for a developed country.
Post reply on HN