this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2024
15 points (89.5% liked)
Collapse
311 readers
48 users here now
This is the place for discussing the potential collapse of modern civilization and the environment.
Collapse, in this context, refers to the significant loss of an established level or complexity towards a much simpler state. It can occur differently within many areas, orderly or chaotically, and be willing or unwilling. It does not necessarily imply human extinction or a singular, global event. Although, the longer the duration, the more it resembles a ‘decline’ instead of collapse.
RULES
1 - Remember the human
2 - Link posts should come from a reputable source
3 - All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith.
4 - No low effort, high volume and low relevance posts.
Related lemmys:
- /c/green
- /c/antreefa
- /c/gardening
- /c/[email protected]
- /c/[email protected]
- c/[email protected]
- /c/biology
- /c/criseciv
- /c/eco
- Old posts https://lemmy.ml/c/collapse
founded 5 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Here is an essay https://thehonestsorcerer.substack.com/p/solar-panels-another-exercise-in I have come across covering things I thought you could find relatively easily on your own. If you're motivated you can fact-check and use it as a point of departure for further reseach. If you're really motivated I can recommend Tim Murphy's textbook https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9js5291m
I could provide proof that your links have mistakes but you should do your own research. I think you can find them relatively easily on your own.
To get you started, compare these numbers which are sourced against your textbook.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_Germany
This concludes the experiment. I did not expect a different outcome.
You expect others to do research to come to your conclusions but won't do research to come to others conclusions.
I even went out of my way to provide you a link that showed a mistake. What research did you do to prove yourself wrong?
I'm running informal sampling about the effectiveness of third party entry-level educational materials on a difficult topic, on a fringe platform. So far the finge platform is not showing a difference to mainstream ones, as potentially possible from audience self-filtering. While N is low the visible conversion factor so far is zero.
To directly address your comment: I am extremely aware of practice of solar PV in Germany, I live there and installed some 2kWp on my roof by myself. Your link has zero relevance to the argument whether current and near future renewable power is autopoietic and whether it also can also create, maintain and power the current global technological society. You need to look at primary energy consumption globally, because solar power infrastructure is merely installed in Germany, using mostly external resources.
I will not continue this thread further unless you can show me you're worth my time.
You're not fooling me and I hope for your mental health you aren't fooling yourself.
But your links didn't provide any proof of your thesis that renewables are not capable of being autopoietic.
The solar data was 6 years out of date. It wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that a limit was reached and no progress has been made. But we have real world data showing solar costs have continued to go down dramatically over the past 6 years. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/solar-pv-prices
The textbook claimed shifting to solar would take 6% of the global gdp over a period of years. But global energy already costs 13% of global gdp. It's not out of reach and that's based on 2018 solar costs.
Do some research.