Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)G
Posts
0
Comments
1417
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Not doing anything at all has the lowest emissions. But it is obviously not the best way to curb impact while preserving lives and quality of life.

    Your adversity to investments that do pay off would be a great hinderance to society as a whole.

    Solar panels can be recycled, take very little materials and manufacturing and are usually not the limiting factor when it comes to transitioning into a low damage economy.

    Throwing away great amounts of cheap solar power because you would have to lift a finger to achieve it is not... Great.

  • No. It relies on the assumption that newer panels produce more energy hence are more eco friendly.

    Plus: I explicitly mentioned them being a great opportunity for the poor.

    Also Pakistan is rapidly building out solar panels without that.

  • To a much lesser extent. Solar panels work a real long time real good. EVs range loss does impact practical use much more than lowering the power output of a solar array.

  • Because solar panels are dirt cheap to produce and your time and construction materials and land has value. Recognizing trash is vital for an eco friendly economy.

    Edit: some red necks do use old solar panels for off grid, low cost setups.

  • Prolly about 80 years or so. While yield slowly dimish they will be more useful as scrap due to advancing tech as opposed to breaking. Also some panels may die but that's rather rare.

  • This is not news but a useful reminder nonetheless.

    Advances in efficiency may cause replacing them to be viable. Still.

  • Yeah. The poster is onion baiting.

  • This is an onion article, in case you missed that.

  • One of the most famous musicians of the time. Never heard of them until that ltt/jimmy fell on TV show.

  • Trotzreaktionen und Reaktionismus sind real. Sich darum Sorgen zu machen ist jetzt erstmal nicht verwerflich...

  • Google "elastocaloric heat pump efficiency" thats the technical term.

  • Some sources claim much higher efficiency. This makes sense to me since you are not limited by your coolant's properties so much and don't have to maintain pressure. But I can't do in depth research for you.

  • You can't. It's a different kind of heat pump.

    If it is more efficient than vacuum-compression it's good.

    Most refrigerants are extremely toxic and extreme green house gasses. But there are safer alternatives, eg. CO2.

  • What I meant is that their quoted numbers alone are insufficient.

  • Pollution from mining and processing is also worse for fossil vehicles. You are factually incorrect.

  • Please note that a fossil fueled vehicle tends to have a much bigger impact wrt. Pollution. Electric vehicles are not just pollution shifting but actual pollution reduction.

  • That's not what the numbers show though. You need more numbers and context to do anything rigorous.