One word. Fukushima. If you're supporting something so incredibly potentially disastrous, why wouldn't you or anybody be jumping up and down in support of solar, hydro and wind?
Well, if we're talking POTENTIALLY...that's like saying, anything in life is potentially disastrous. So to use Fukushima, although a fair disaster worth mentioning, that's like saying lets stop EV or lithium production because of the potential for disaster with it! All methods of energy production claim they're finding safer ways to do it. Why does nuclear have to be the one avoided and not pursued with billions of federal grants?
I mean, a flight the other day just had to be rerouted because of a battery fire on board. That was a potential for disaster right there.
Had a great convo w/ an engineer last summer who works on battery production and he even expressed his concerns for particular versions of it and how difficult it is to extinguish when they catch fire. Iirc, he recalled a test in Cali where they intentionally sank a shipping container of burning lithium and being submerged still didn't extinguish it. Something about it having to self extinguish. I dunno. I'd have to ask him again for that explanation.
Anyway, I'm not 100% opposed to it but I do believe the excessive (and premature) granting of so much wind/solar is political in nature. Politicians and large companies only care about money for themselves and the earth and everything on it can burn for all they care. I firmly believe politicians are being gifted money to approve the land leases when not on private property. And if it is about the environment, why are they afraid to give the marine life autopsies to find out why they're dying? If they're so confident, they should have an independent company (or two) do it each and every time a whale washes ashore to prove they're right. What are they hiding?
If we have to scalp the land or ocean for thousands of square miles to achieve the same energy production as nuclear on a smaller footprint, why not do it? Dirty mining for all forms already exist. So let's call that a wash.
I'm not an expert in any of this. But then again, I don't think the experts are experts either. so.
Oh and if we keep somewhat on track w/ wind. Recent article here. Now, you tell me....if they can't figure out how to keep these things standing on land, where maintenance is logistically easier, what makes anyone think a more volatile landscape....the ocean...will be any better?
Giant Wind Turbines Keep Mysteriously Falling Over. This Shouldn't Be Happening.
Tell me someone at least sees how much damage and waste this world is creating and I'm not sure it's intended benefit is doing any good.