you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Vigte 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I'm talking about businesses (as the primary source of the pollution problem) using green-tech when it directly lowers their overhead costs, not individuals.

[–]yetanotherone_sigh 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Ah, understood. I read somewhere that the cost per KWH of new green energy (wind turbines, solar panels) is fast approaching the cost per KWH of a new coal power plant. The only problem is storing the energy, or having enough of it when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining. The obvious answer is to pump water uphill into man-made reservoirs when you have excess energy, and generate electricity with that water when the wind isn't blowing and the sun isn't shining. It's essentially a grid-scale battery. It's just expensive to have to build all that storage at scale.

Nuclear is still the best long-term option if you are shooting to not burn coal or natural gas. We just need to get over the political hurdle of reprocessing the waste or storing it for long term.

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah a gravity battery, I think it's called. They're pretty efficient.