Hacker News Reader

Comment by happyjack | Hacker News Reader

Just because the morons in your home country are buying shit mobiles to drive 1 km a day to and from work (or whatever stupid units you use) is not an indicator for the world at large. 2030 is gas and diesel cars! Just like how 80% of our power is still going to be hydrocarbons in 2030. Read all the fantasy you want; physics and thermodynamics do not change. If the world does not split atoms in a large scale we will burn coal or natural gas.

My comments along with SV's comments is how ignorant most people are to how things are made and done, because the majority of the folks on sites like this type code for a living and argue things for arguments sake, and don't actually make real, tangible things.

View on HN

What is physics not allowing? They are starting to close in on ICE range and are much better cars overall. What exactly don't you like about them?

The physics of power generation. Have a battery car all you like. The electrons powering that car are coming from coal.

More gas than coal over here, but we’re close to 50% renewable energy and growing fast. I use an exclusively solar/wind provider, and with a set of solar panels I could easily generate enough power for 10.000km/year charging at home. You might need to revise some of your concepts.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/eus-use-of-fossil-fuels-for-elec...

Just to keep things real and your eye on the ball, there's a caveat (well, several) to the statistic you've quoted and linked.

That's "close to" 50% renewables in some regions toward replacing current electricity generation.

If all vehicles stopped using petrol | diesal tomorrow and automagically becam electric the demand for electricity would increase dramatically and renewable contributions as a percentage would dwindle.

It's good work so far but there's still a long way to go, much to do, and a few billion tonnes of mining to churn through just to provide resources for your goal.

Ricardobeat is sipping the kool aid. First, just because an energy source has a name plate capacity of x does not mean it generates x. Typically, wind and solar generate 10% of their nameplate value (while fossil fuels generate 100%)! Also, there has to be a baseline power source on the grid (which is fossils fuels, using gas from Russia in your part of the world)!

Also, I would check your stats. It's officially 70% fossil fuel usage in Green ol EU (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/D...).

I'm sorry, but everyone is out of their mind on these issues. The only way to achieve CO2 reductions is by using nuclear power. That's the fact.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com