this post was submitted on 01 Dec 2023
162 points (100.0% liked)
World News
22000 readers
45 users here now
Breaking news from around the world.
News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
For US News, see the US News community.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Norway ran on 100% renewables for like 80 years, but no one cares.
Only reason we’re not at 100% anymore is because politicians don’t find it a priority to be self-sufficient and it’s much better to sell Norwegian renewable electricity to Europe for a profit, then buy back dirty electricity and let the consumers in Norway pay a cable transit tax to the government.
See, now you get to sell the energy twice, and both times at a higher rate.
You can't compare other countries with the likes of Norway or Iceland. For most countries, hydro isn't enough to meet the needs. Not to mention the fact that it isn't truly renewable. What happens when climate change makes water more scarce?
The true renewable production became possible only recently with the advances in PV, wind and battery tech.
Yeah I'd agree with you, I think the reason Norway isn't 100% renewable has a little more to do with growing demand, as well as seasonal variation. Saying that, I'm sure this could have been addressed if the government had properly encouraged development of more clean generation.
Honestly, the entire world could have been in a much better situation if we had pushed for renewables a long time ago. The first identification of the global greenhouse effect was in 1892 - more than 130 years ago. There was plenty of time to come up with alternatives, considering how fast technology develops (how many knew mobile phones before 1995?).
We are in a serious mess not for the lack of understanding or resources. Some people wanted to be rich at the expense of the majority of ordinary people, all other species and the entire planetary biome. They made sure that no other technology would challenge the world's dependence on oil. They chose profits over countless lives on the brink of a mass extinction event.
I understand why you feel the need to blame the government. But I can't help but rant about the insatiable greed and the crime that resulted from it on a scale that the planet has never witnessed before (I don't think any species, much less a few individuals, ever caused so much destruction before). And while those criminals (for lack of a better word suitable for their actions) live a life in luxury without consequences, the rest of us are being gaslighted by the same vermin for the damage they caused.
I'm sorry for the lengthy rant. Thank you for understanding!
Even now, going hard on renewables is the best strategy. The technology is cheap, proven and readily available. If we build an excess of renewables we can wean off of fossil fuels most quickly, even diverting resources to nuclear will only slow down this goal.
The government do have ultimate responsibility, even if they're influenced by the greed of wealthy people and organisations.
Something something “not supposed to join them”.
Forget Norway!