It's fair pointing out the lack of (sufficient) storage for electric energy, but I'd say the average price of electricity in Finland for the past week indicates both capabilities of renawables and lack of storage.
zergtoshi
joined 1 year ago
I stand corrected regarding ultimate disposal and apparently they are planning to use it in a clever way.
Thank you for letting me know!
Compared to fossil fuels I tend to prefer nuclear as well, because even though mining uranium has quite some ecological impact including emitting carbon emissions, running a nuclear power plant doesn't have carbon emissions and that's important.
What worries me is that there are nuclear power plants around the world and despite the first nuclear power plant having been built 70 years ago, not a single ultimate disposal place for the radioactive waste has been found/created.
Having "cheap" electric energy for 3-4 generations and putting a burden on the next 40,000 generations just does sound like a bad deal to me.
Until we have more wind and hydro, keeping nuclear running might be a price we have to pay.
Not being able to dispose of some more (thousands of) tons of radioactive waste is making the problem only quantitatively worse and not qualitatively.
It's a great example to show electric energy based on wind, water, solar is the way to go - not only because it's more environmentally friendly than fossil fuels of any kind or nuclear, but it's economically better as well.
Thanks for sharing!
Does it count as a concept of a plan?
I wonder - and I mean this seriouslyand not in an /s way - what happens, if you object "bOth SiDeS" with "Why not vote for Harris then?"?
Surely you won't convince a Trumpologist this way.
But doesn't that also give leeway to present voting for Harris as equally good choice in the eyes of Trumpologists?
Unexpected Keyboard
https://github.com/Julow/Unexpected-Keyboard
Available on F-Droid
You can pretty much configure the whole layout. Not sure about gif support though.
Yah, less contagious, but as deadly, which is kinda horrible 😕
Not of it's neither A nor B ;)
Would you trust ChatGPT to know?
There's attempts at having payments with 0 fees, that is, if you don't involve exchanges or payment service providers, who obviously charge a fee for fiat conversion.
Using Nano you have 0 fees for the transaction and ideally as little as 0.25% fee at an exchange for fiat conversion.
It's not only without fees, it's very fast (ideallly sub-second confirmation) and eco-friendly (requiring no special hardware, because there is no mining and using very little energy overall).
What's lacking is places where you can actually pay for things with Nano, but that's the classic chicken and egg problem.
Fixing issues like energy consumption, confirmation time, fees?
Just in case you haven't heard of Nano, allow me to tell you it's an attempt at creating a peer-to-peer digital currency with minimal energy consumption, 0 fees, 0 minimum account balance, very fast confirmation (ideally sub-second, sometimes a bit slower) and 0 supply inflation.
It focuses on doing one thing and doing it well: transferring value efficiently, sustsinably and without middlemen.
It's around since 2015 and still kicking, getting better and better with each release, ironing kinks out.
It might sound too good to be true, but it's worth a look; make up your own mind.
view more: next ›
Is it really a threat to muse about what could happen as some random person on the internet?
It's not like OP announced to do it or called for it to be done.
I'd see it differently if a person with a lot of followers (especially crazy ones) would dare to think something like this aloud. Does this law cover former presidents as well?
Anyway... Remember: it's a losing battle trying to be tolerant of the intolerant!