People in this thread are hitting us with all sorts of whatabout stories with extreme conditions; and meanwhile I'm working in a office where people will come in and turn on the cooling because they just walked up some stairs, and then turn on the heating after they've sat down for a couple of minutes. No concept of self regulation. Just any hint of discomfort means the room has to change temperature.
It that context, the pushback in this thread is a bit depressing.
My proof is that actually that my pet cat knows more about manufacturing than he does, therefore he doesn't know the most. In fact, my cat knows literally everything possible to know about manufacturing. It's amazing. And if you don't believe me, then you need to show your evidence that it isn't true. Also, my cat doesn't routinely give misinformation about the capabilities of the products made by their companies.
Pretty much anything you can think of is recommended by someone, because different people have conflicting views. The key is to choose whose recommendations are based on the best reasoning & evidence aligning with your goals.
I've never owned any Apple product whatsoever - and yet I'm in a similar position to you. Their standings have risen in my eyes simply by keeping their badness level relatively stable while Microsoft and Google rapidly get worse.
We're here in "no stupid questions". The OP asked a question. So if you want to offer some of your knowledge and insight - go for it. But simply telling OP "you don't understand" isn't really adding anything of value.
It will outlast bs. Mastodon has been around for many years now. It already outlasted Google+, which was bigger and had more funding. And since it has a broad base of support it's unlikely that it will all just fall apart. Unlike the commercial social networks, no single person can pull the plug the fediverse. (Lemmy is younger, but it also seems very strong right now. I just hope lemmy still gets some exposure on the outside now that the major drama at reddit has died down.)
I've been a great fan of gaming for my entire long life. But I don't play online games any more, because so many gamers are toxic. Obviously there are good individuals and some good outposts, but taken as a whole it is a toxic community.
You'd reach more people on bigger platforms, but it is easier to steer the conversation with smaller groups. So I don't think its totally clear-cut where the best psyops targets would be.
The cost of constructing and decommissioning power plants is important for sure; but it has nothing to do with energy density - which is what we were talking about before. It's true that building solar panels takes energy and resources, and the panels don't last indefinitely. So there is a lifecycle cost to using them. But the same is true for all forms of power generation.
A common way to compare these costs is to look at the 'payback time' of each form of power generation. The payback time is the amount of time it would take for the power plant to produce enough energy to pay back the lifecycle costs required to build, operate, and decommission that type of plant. It's basically how long it takes for the construction to have been 'worth it'.
In terms of payback time, wind power is by far the best; typically taking less than 1 year to pay itself off. Solar is pretty good too, but is highly dependent on where it is used. And nuclear... is not good on this measure. It takes decades for a nuclear power plant to pay itself off, because the plants are very expensive to build and decommission.
Obviously there are other things to consider in terms of the strengths and weaknesses of different forms of power generation. But you've been talking about the cost of materials and construction as though it is a weakness of renewables, and it really really isn't. That's in fact one of their strengths, and a major weakness of nuclear. Its strange that you say nuclear is 'insanity powerful for its cost', because its cost is the greatest weakness of nuclear power. Its much cleaner than coal, but much more expensive, even though it uses so little fuel. And it is not cleaner than solar or wind, but it is still more expensive.
Your point about land usage is a stronger point in favour of nuclear power... except that depending on what country you are talking about, that could easily swing the other way. Solar and wind do take up more space than nuclear, that's for sure. But nuclear requires certain geological conditions for the safe operation of the plant, and the storage of waste. So depending on where you live, finding unused land suitable for renewables can be much easier than finding a suitable location for a nuclear power plant and waste containment facility.
Just mention lemmy from time to time on other platforms; not to say "please come here", but rather just to let people know that lemmy exists and has interesting stuff on it. People will check it out if they are interested.
The receipts for food aren't so that you can return it. They are for expenses record keeping. For example, some jobs have a food allowance; or special tax concessions for food bought while working. But to get those benefits you need to have evidence that you bought the food.
What are you trying to say here? Are we still talking about fuel types here?
Again, let me point out that solar power does not consume any fuel. The materials used to construct the solar panels are not having any power extracted from them. And secondly, nuclear power plants require construction materials too. ... So I really don't know what kind of comparison you are asking for here.
only antimatter could provide more energy density, it’s insanely powerful.
Nuclear energy indeed has very high energy per mass of fuel. But so what? Solar and wind power doesn't even use fuel. So the energy density thing is a bit of a distraction.
People in this thread are hitting us with all sorts of whatabout stories with extreme conditions; and meanwhile I'm working in a office where people will come in and turn on the cooling because they just walked up some stairs, and then turn on the heating after they've sat down for a couple of minutes. No concept of self regulation. Just any hint of discomfort means the room has to change temperature.
It that context, the pushback in this thread is a bit depressing.