![](https://slrpnk.net/pictrs/image/601deed2-1340-43d5-8d4b-e24022db9d66.webp)
![](https://slrpnk.net/pictrs/image/e82bd59d-d50f-4917-9301-ab6ce08a6c80.png)
What is the advantage of an 8GW solar farm compared to say 100 80MW farms? The smaller ones should be distributed over more land, cancelling out clouds and do not interrupt the landscape nearly as much as the large one.
What is the advantage of an 8GW solar farm compared to say 100 80MW farms? The smaller ones should be distributed over more land, cancelling out clouds and do not interrupt the landscape nearly as much as the large one.
The problem is that there is really no great alternative to Googles search. Most of the other ones use Bing in the backend, which ends up being Microsoft. If anybody knows of a good search engine, which works well and is none commercial that would be great.
There are quite a few earlier cases for drilling though. For example Biden tried to stop new leases for oil and gas projects on public land, but that got struck down by a court. That was three years ago.
Also this is about new export terminals. Due to new emissions regulation for cars, the inflation reduction act and a few other laws, US oil and gas consumption is likely to fall. So the oil and gas companies try to export more. Hence more terminals.
What about slow driving? Cars are bigger anyway and if you for example need some time to slowly cross a red light one car per phase, it completly crashes the cities transport system. For a city like London that would work perfectly.
And this is why there is more drilling under Biden. Court orders to keep up drilling, court orders to allow exports and court orders stopping climate legislation. The courts being stacked by Trumps judges.
Sure, but why would you built a nuclear power plant, when you are faster in having a clean grid with wind and solar. The workers building the npp could built more wind and solar after all.
Because solar and wind can be deployed much faster. You rather easily have a decade of extra coal or gas emissions, if you built nuclear today.
That is quite simply a lie. There are plenty of studies, that even just introducing a speed limit on the autobahn would have been enough. There are other nearly free options as well, like allowing municipalities to implement anti car urban planing more easily.
The problem is that the ministry for transport is moving billions from the railways to car infrastructure, while delaying the switch to EVs as much as possible.
The law, which has been weakend by the current government, was made due to the constitutional court ordering the government to strengthen its climate commitments. So this one has a decent chance of working.
Look fab labs, hacker space, maker spaces or whatever it is named in your area. Those are not exactly everywhere, but common enough to have a look at. Another somewhat related space would be a repair cafe. That would give you not only access to a workshop, but also a bunch of folks for inspiration.
Other then that look up Arduino and RaspberryPi solar projects. It is pretty easy to find some lists. 3d printers are pretty common, as are many other similar tools. Home automation can also be interesting, but that might not be that great of an option, if you rent. Micromobility can also be somewhat interesting(elector skateboards, self assembling a bicycle…). It is also rather easy to set up a solar system in a flat, as long as you can easily install it outside it on a balcony or whatever. There is also a pretty large diy loudpspeaker community, which apparently is pretty easy to built.
Honestly there are lots of projects. Just think of something you would like to have and look up diy version of it. Seriously people built nearly everything at home. There even was a supersonic kit plane sold once, which apparently never managed to go supersonic and had a habit of killing its pilots, but you get my point.
Most emissions are caused by rich people. Quite frankly as soon as you forget about the car, the rest is rather cheap. Solar panels powering a home are not crazily expensive and organic food staples are also not that much more expensive then the conventional competition. Electric cars are expensive, but the proper choice is to try to live car free anyway. A bicycle is cheap after all.
Anybody who actually is emitting more then the global average can live in a way that massivly reduces their emissions and afford to do it. Not to zero, but to a point, where it is absolutly reasitic to demand companies and governments to push for the rest.
So does wind, just not as fast as solar.
Seasonal storage is mostly not needed. Close to the equator it is not due to not really having a season problem. Further to the poles you have stronger winds in winter.
The UK offshored most of its emissions. So as soon as you adjust for that it is about at the level of the EU on a per capita bases. However the EU has much more laws passed to actually reduce emissions in the coming years.
Yeah what a shame that the UK still allows some form of protest and does not just shoot them like the Chinese. /s
Seriously the UK is the fithed largest cumulative emitter and even though that is over litterally centuries even recent emissions are well above the global average. Combine that with a government, which allows even more oil and gas drilling, while even opening up a new coal mine. The UK is doing better then quite a few other countries, but it is not exactly great.
Wissing to be honest. The transport sector is the only one to miss the target badly. Funnily enough 15billion€ is about as much as is currently missing to fix up the German railway network. As in fix it, not expand it.
Please read the article and not just the title. It is only about the EU and European is used like American is used for the US. Technically not true, but often used in more casual speech and by lower quality news sources.
WTF are you talking about? This is about the Effort Sharing Regulation(ESR), which requires EU members to lower emissions compared to 2005 depending on how rich they are(richer countries need to do more). The UK is therefore not part of this at all, as it is no longer an EU member. Neither is Iceland btw.
A war over Taiwan would at first be a naval conflict. Ukraine does not need many anti ship weapons and does not get many as well. Those factories are mainly free.
For many other systems the West is running at capacity and increasing it. Air defence missiles for example. Taiwan has Patriot and it would only be a matter of moving production to Ukraine to Taiwan instead to make it work. The West has jets, so there are other options of winning the air war. Ukraine currently gets F-16. So no longer as much needed and maybe the Europeans could intervene with a few jets, if need be. Similar story for a lot of other weapon systems. Increased production in Europe, which can be delivered to Taiwan.
Then you have use of weapons. It is much more likely that Taiwan will be allowed to strike China right away. No discussion as we saw in Ukraine.
Also yes China is not ready. They have to win the naval war and then be able to land. Invading Taiwan is much harder then invading Ukraine over what is flat open ground.