California Electric Vehicles
Who thinks California's electrical grid can support charging of more electric vehicles?
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
2cool4school · 46-50, F
We need nuclear power more than ever.
helenS · 36-40, F
@2cool4school Oh yes! We can see in Ukraine what it means to have nuclear power plants when there's a war.
2cool4school · 46-50, F
@helenS WTF ??! Really??! I’m not following you here ?? Exactly what does the nuclear power of the Ukraine have to do with the fact that it is the only power generating system not affected by climate change/water levels in hydroelectric plant reservoirs as well as solar and wind farms ?? Are you just trying to make conversation or do actually have something that you can explain and believe in??
helenS · 36-40, F
@2cool4school Atomic power plants make a country vulnerable.
To provide a country with energy we need millions of photovoltaic systems, wind energy, biomass, water, sun, geothermal energy, tides and wind – they either renew themselves quickly or their use does not deplete the source.
To provide a country with energy we need millions of photovoltaic systems, wind energy, biomass, water, sun, geothermal energy, tides and wind – they either renew themselves quickly or their use does not deplete the source.
2cool4school · 46-50, F
@helenS
Millions of photovoltaic cells have to be replaced and are susceptible to everything from dust to cloudy skies and in the time of conflict would be pretty easy to put out of commission.
Geothermal is nice but it’s not available everywhere or it would be a lot more prominent.
Wind generated energy is the weakest of the bunch and takes a lot of maintenance as being costly to build up and isn’t a viable option in many areas just like geothermal.
Tidal energy again not too easily fostered garnered or gained from.
Biomass is still in its infancy.
I don’t think you understand that most areas on the planet use a combination of sources for a reason and that’s because you just can’t count on one type of source generating enough energy to meet the demand. Nuclear power is not just an easy solution it’s often the most reliable solution and a major reason for the use in both Russia the Ukraine and the rest of the world is because it has a lot more beneficial properties and fewer problems. It’s been proven effective and in technologically advanced countries like Japan for example it works well when it’s built correctly (ex Fukushima not built correctly). If you look at just the Ukraine and Russia where they rely on it instead of having to send energy across large areas, where energy is lost in process, they have built nuclear power stations to supply and support zones with heavy usage due to larger populations. Of course if you want to believe that it is dangerous to use nuclear energy than you’re free to do so but you’re not accurate. So it’s up to you. Do some research though I don’t expect you to believe me at face value.
Atomic power plants make a country vulnerable.
To provide a country with energy we need millions of photovoltaic systems, wind energy, biomass, water, sun, geothermal energy, tides and wind – they either renew themselves quickly or their use does not deplete the source.
Actually you have it bassackwards. Vulnerable how ?? You can run a nuclear plant on a skeleton crew and still power up massive areas. Nuclear power is not a vulnerability it’s just an easy low waste production form of making energy. Especially when you compare it to coal. To provide a country with energy we need millions of photovoltaic systems, wind energy, biomass, water, sun, geothermal energy, tides and wind – they either renew themselves quickly or their use does not deplete the source.
Millions of photovoltaic cells have to be replaced and are susceptible to everything from dust to cloudy skies and in the time of conflict would be pretty easy to put out of commission.
Geothermal is nice but it’s not available everywhere or it would be a lot more prominent.
Wind generated energy is the weakest of the bunch and takes a lot of maintenance as being costly to build up and isn’t a viable option in many areas just like geothermal.
Tidal energy again not too easily fostered garnered or gained from.
Biomass is still in its infancy.
I don’t think you understand that most areas on the planet use a combination of sources for a reason and that’s because you just can’t count on one type of source generating enough energy to meet the demand. Nuclear power is not just an easy solution it’s often the most reliable solution and a major reason for the use in both Russia the Ukraine and the rest of the world is because it has a lot more beneficial properties and fewer problems. It’s been proven effective and in technologically advanced countries like Japan for example it works well when it’s built correctly (ex Fukushima not built correctly). If you look at just the Ukraine and Russia where they rely on it instead of having to send energy across large areas, where energy is lost in process, they have built nuclear power stations to supply and support zones with heavy usage due to larger populations. Of course if you want to believe that it is dangerous to use nuclear energy than you’re free to do so but you’re not accurate. So it’s up to you. Do some research though I don’t expect you to believe me at face value.