The head of the Australian energy market operator AEMO, Daniel Westerman, has rejected nuclear power as a way to replace Australia’s ageing coal-fired power stations, arguing that it is too slow and too expensive. In addition, baseload power sources are not competitive in a grid dominated by wind and solar energy anyway.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-2 points

I already mentioned 2.

Or think back to the extinction of dinosaurs, where after a meteorite crashed into earth the sun was blocked by dust for several years.

Picture a super volcano eruption covering the sky in ashes for thousands of miles

Here’s a quote from the wiki on super volcanos:

Large-volume supervolcanic eruptions are also often associated with large igneous provinces, which can cover huge areas with lava and volcanic ash. These can cause long-lasting climate change (such as the triggering of a small ice age) and threaten species with extinction. The Oruanui eruption of New Zealand’s Taupō Volcano (about 25,600 years ago) was the world’s most recent VEI-8 eruption.

Also, you wouldn’t need it to cover all of Australia to be disastrous, just enough to block a significant amount of solar farms.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I think if a planet killer asteroid hits it won’t exactly matter our solar panels don’t work mate

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

sight

The meteor didn’t kill the dinosaurs, it was the dust cloud that did so by blacking out the sun. If you have sources of energy that are not reliant on the sun, it is very much possible to survive it. You can use artificial light to make grow food, and you can even make air processors if plants start dying. But you can’t do that if you have no power.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

no shit. and if it happened now, the dust cloud would essentially kill our civilisation as we know it. a small percentage of people would survive, and it wouldn’t matter if they had nuclear power or not, there are other power sources other than solar. arguing for nuclear in case a planet killer blankets us in dust for decades might be the worst argument I’ve heard in favour of nuclear

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

If you’re talking about an extinction level event like that which caused the death of the dinosaurs then I think we have bigger problems.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

then I think we have bigger problems

Care to point them out? As I’ve said, and expect to be common knowledge on a (I would expect) scientifically leaning community, the dinosaurs weren’t killed by the meteor, their death was caused by the blacking out of the sun. You have access to energy, you can make air filters, grow food, purify water. If you don’t have energy, then you die.

Regardless, this is a deflection from the main point, that was merely an extreme example, even volcanic eruptions could cause huge disruptions if you depend too much on solar power.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Care to point them out? The fact all our crops would die is a big one

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

There are historical accounts of volcanic activity blocking the sky, I think in Europe, for a few years. For all we know it was the whole planet. That would definitely disrupt solar energy collection without being an extinction level event.

Diversity is a genuine factor of fossil fuel free energy generation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Literally no sun for years would mean no crops which means everyone and all their animals would be dead

permalink
report
parent
reply

Green Energy

!energy@slrpnk.net

Create post

Everything about energy production and storage.

Related communities:

Community stats

  • 1.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 415

    Posts

  • 1.6K

    Comments