There are at least 5 better alternatives to wind and solar, but we don't teach science any more in public schools.
If we did, there wouldn't even BE climate change alarmist hysteria poised to destroy entire economies.
If we did, there wouldn't even BE climate change alarmist hysteria poised to destroy entire economies.
I suggest you have a second look at the HN guidelines [1].
I can think of a couple of other renewable resources: Geothermal and Hydroelectric, but Geothermal is geographically limited and Hydroelectric has proven to have more environmental impact than we would like. I have no idea on what the other three could be. I guess you could include Nuclear in the list, but the price points on that make it hard to declare it better than Solar and Wind.
Earthquakes -- there is some causality
Destruction of fish habitat -- salmon in Columbia river
In general, making water go slow when it used to go fast has a lot more negative consequence for the environment than one might expect.
I find this episode of 99 percent invisible to be really informative -- https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/fish-cannon/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_reserv...
The biggest is the destruction of migrating fish habitat, sometimes reversible with specialized structures (salmon ladders), sometimes not. There is also some evidence for increased CO2 emissions from artificial reservoirs.
The impact of creating water reservoirs must be immense. Because we are dreaming about replacing hydro with vastly inferior power sources.
genuinely curious