Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "Renewable Energy is The Scam We All Fell For" video.

  1. "has flaws" is too soft of a criticism for something we'll sink billions of dollars into and will prove useless, forcing us to buy thorium technology from China because we refused to research it ourselves.
    9
  2.  @totalermist  solar installations on rooftops are only useful to power the house they're mounted on (apartment buildings cannot power themselves because they have too many households per square meter). If you want to have an industry or even a telecommunications service you need solar farms. Funny how people claim others are lying and then say outright falsehoods like pretending rooftop pannels can power a country.
    3
  3.  MunroM84  Germany us mining brown coal, though...
    3
  4.  @Loopanyway  so because lobbyists breathe oxygen should we stop breathing too?
    2
  5.  @camillealexandrebonnes2682  objectivity deals with facts. If facts are negative towards one side and positive towards another, it's not a flaw from an objectivity standpoint. If you want to question objectivity, present a countering argument that exposes the subjectivity in the picking of the facts.
    2
  6.  @samarmajumdar573  he means geothermal.
    2
  7. @UCU30G17XriGiXEW9u7ITt3w that's the "best" part of the situation. I'd rather take a stroll through the Chernobyl exclusion zone than live 30 years next to a coal plant. There's no exclusion zones because coal plants don't need to obey any nuclear regulatory standards. You're inhaling that shit just like a smoker gets his lungs full of radioactive isotopes but there's no warning on the label. You're severely increasing the chances of dying of a horrible cancer but nobody talks about it.
    2
  8. The researchers at Oak Ridge dismantled their reactor and there was no corrosion after roughly 5 years. That problrm was solved decades ago.
    1
  9. Coal plants pump out more radiation than nuclear plants.
    1
  10.  @fpvllama3068  preferable to living next to a coal plant. Have you ever heard about how smoking actually makes you inhale radioactive isotopes that get stuck in your lungs and irradiate your cells? That's what it's like living next to a coal plant.
    1
  11. How is it flawed? Renewables aren't even economically feasible and require tax credits/subsidies to be worth adopting. They require too much area for the power they produce and their output cannot be controlled requiring secondary installations for energy storage. Nothing about this is flawed.
    1
  12. Thorium fuel is recovered from normal mining operations. Trucks and trains can be electrically powered.
    1
  13.  @willybee3056  You know what I meant. If things are transported in an electric train or truck you can't exactly claim the nuclear fuel requires fossil fuel to be transported. And having a powered cable for the train or batteries for the truck is much less damaging to the environment than batteries to power huge cities and industry.
    1
  14.  @willybee3056  "people assume, just because it is nuclear, there is no pollution or carbon associated with it" - and the same thing with solar and wind. The point is, solar and wind generate a lot less power. So sure, a nuclear plant will have impact because everything you build has an impact. But you'll get so much power out of it that it evens out.
    1
  15.  @willybee3056  "the last I heard was 250k yrs, before it was not a bio hazard" - the longer an isotope lasts the less radioactive it is. Thorium reactors can burn up the nuclear waste from older reactors and reduce the storage requirements.
    1
  16.  @willybee3056  if you have an hour to spare: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6mhw-CNxaE
    1
  17. >promotes nuclear >"fossil fuel industry" You people make me sick with all the ignorance you display.
    1
  18. >micro Okay and you can't power cities and industry with that. You can't create free energy. If you put enough micro generators along a river to power a large city and factories, you have essentially did the same thing a dam does.
    1
  19. He's not pro-CO2 so that means nothing.
    1
  20. Geothermal is nuclear. For fuck's sake where do you think the heat comes from? Radioactive decay.
    1
  21.  @jjk087  you TWAT, geothermal is a shitty energy source. Can't be used except in certain areas and you're essentially fracking the region.
    1
  22.  @blackpearl1-477  "only using earth's internal heat alone and not using the nuclear decay" - my friend, where do you think the internal heat comes from...?
    1
  23.  @blackpearl1-477  okay, and do you know where that heat comes from? Radioactive decay. That is all.
    1
  24. Geothermal is essentially just tapping into the radioactive decay of isotopes in the Earth's crust. It's nuclear with extra steps.
    1
  25. Which is a very small percentage of usable land and thus limits solar/wind even more.
    1
  26.  @yann5489  "The point isn't that we need 100% renewable now" - but then it's like hiring a person with disabilities and giving them a simple job so that they feel good about themselves. I'm all for it, but at least let's admit the... limitations. If we're going to put solar and wind in a corner and let them do their own thing we can't be wasting time on coming up with the true energy source that's gonna power the backbone of every country. "most of wind turbines are put on fields where there is no ecosystem" - even if that's true taking energy away from the winds causes damages to ecosystems "downwind". This means less wind which can affect natural erosion and birds but also higher temperatures in the regions affected. Of course the differences studied are pretty small. But if we start building more and more at one point the effects on the environment will be observable.
    1
  27. No, they won't. Thorium is virtually unlimited.
    1
  28.  @totalermist  "Neither wind nor solar and especially nuclear are a one size-fits-all solution since those don't exist." - but nuclear fits into the existing system we have. A big ass power source connected to the grid that can have its output managed according to demand. Solar and wind are the ones that don't fit the mold because their power output cannot be regulated and thus require secondary stations storing the energy. "nowhere did I make the case that a country can be powered by installing solar panels on rooftops alone" - but rooftop solar panels are a cool off grid solution, when connected to the grid you barely make any money back from the excess production as you can only generate enough for your own needs. It's a neat novelty and the tax credits/subsidies make it attractive as it breaks even in about 10 years but covering a city in solar panels doesn't make sense. It's an individual choice to make, not a solution.
    1
  29.  @ep5acg  "The worst accident scenario at a coal plant is more in line with what we would trust a private company or government to manage" - coal plants pump out radioactivity like crazy - somehow we can trust private corporations with coal even though they burn material brought from the depths of the Earth contaminated with radioactive isotopes, but can't be trusted with nuclear power which is one of the most regulated industries in the world...
    1
  30.  @ep5acg  how is it specious? "You are using non-accident scenario nuclear power plants as your point of reference, yet you are replying to a comment about accident scenarios. Strange thing to do." - a non-accident with a coal plant causes unseen, nearly impossible to quantify damage. Unseen, nearly impossible to quantify damage can only be caused by a nuclear power plant in case of a disaster. Coal plants do in their normal operation what a nuclear disaster does.
    1
  31.  @ep5acg  "A coal plant is incapable of creating a disaster like Chernobyl" - CO2 emissions apparently caused a disaster that is requiring the states to spend billions in fixing the damage we caused to the environment If rising waters will displace millions, the heat will affect our crops and kill us with tropical diseases carried by mosquitoes... that's just as bad as the India-Pakistan war.
    1
  32.  @ep5acg  "fact is today our options are not "more boiling water nuclear plants" or "coal" as you are trying so hard to make it out to be" - I'm not "trying" it to be. Just saying that if you don't want to burn fossil fuel, renewable energy won't save us. If you don't want nuclear, you're gonna need to burn fossil fuel.
    1
  33. How is it deceiving?
    1
  34. There is a physical limit to efficiency. I think solar pannels max out at 30% right now and the theoretical physical limit is around 40% efficiency.
    1
  35. Thorium reactors can "burn" waste from older nuclear plants and shorten the decay of said waste.
    1
  36. Because we can't just build hydro everywhere and disrupt the hydrographic basin of every country.
    1
  37. No, I won't trust you. Mankind will survive either way because we lived through higher temperatures in the past, we'll just have to accept another standard of living. But the loss of biodiversity will happen either way if we make stupid choices. So if we're not saving anything, we might as well accept the climate change and go live in a slightly warmer Siberia to flee rising water and insects.
    1
  38. Hydrogen requires energy to separate water into H2 and O2. Hydrogen isn't an energy source, but a fuel.
    1
  39. Thermal is just nuclear energy with extra steps. The water injection into the porous rock has the same downsides as fracking, and when the water comes back up it brings radioactive isotopes to the surface that are often unregulated. I know it's only one study but an area around a geothermal station in Iceland was found to have higher cancer rates. Further study is necessary.
    1
  40. And other countries using the Euro?
    1
  41. @Sourav okay, now power a factory with several double crank presses and CNC milling machines. Your panels can power your own house and that's it - and it's only economically feasible thanks to tax credits/subsidies. Apartment buildings don't have enough footprint to power every house, which means powering a city from the rooftops can't work. Powering a country's industry? Not happening. You'd need large solar farms.
    1
  42.  Pentagon1337  tapping energy from hydro means using gravity to pull water to a lower height. The Netherlands contained the water by fighting gravity. They're trying to keep the water "up" or else the country floods.
    1
  43. You people are displaying your ignorance in full force. How is a pro-nuclear video a defense of the fossil fuel industry?
    1
  44. But that wouldn't power industry.
    1