Greenpeace International“You cannot blow up the sun. It is incredibly difficult to disable a decentralised network of millions of rooftop solar panels. Distributed energy is inherently more resilient to sabotage than a handful of massive, vulnerable thermal plants.”
KerplunkIt is incredibly difficult to disable a decentralised network of millions of solar panels with household battery storage.
Full agreement. Power networks are soft targets, atomic power stations and radioactive waste storage a horrific disaster waiting to be triggered.
kravietz 🦇Yet, nuclear power stations are the only reason why #Ukraine power grid works after #Russia has annihilated hydro power plants, coal and gas power plants, and stole huge PV farms in Kherson oblast. Nuclear power plants, which Russians did not dare to destroy - and portable petrol generators, which kind of do count as distributed power generation. That’s the real world versus crypto nerd’s imagination 😄
And as it comes to PV - yes, you can’t “blow up the sun” but 1) a single country - China - currently controls[^1] 85% of the whole PV supply chain, 2) panels are easily damaged by natural (hailstorm, wind) and human factors (cluster munitions, fire) plus they depend on inverters which can be hacked remotely[^2]
[^1]: https://www.iea.org/reports/securing-clean-energy-technology-supply-chains
[^2]: https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/the-gigantic-unregulated-power-plants-in-the-cloud/
Canvases By Peter 🇵🇸@kravietz @Kerplunk @greenpeace ...and how many times has Ukraine come within a hair of a major nuclear disaster after the latest bombings? 10? 100? 1,000 times? It's only through sheer LUCK it hasn't happened.. Yet.
Of course if a solar panel is hit, you simply replace it, not evacuate the entire area for 50-500years.......... But ahwell, keep hatin'on green I guess.. 🤷♂️
within a hair of a major nuclear disaster after the latest bombings
Literally zero times, because Russians never dared to bomb Ukrainian nuclear power plants. At the same time they caused massive environmental pollution by targeting chemical plants, conventional power plants, hydroelectric power plant in Nova Kakhovka, killing hundreds of people and pollution hundreds of km2 around Dnipro river etc.
What you’re comparing is an imaginary nuclear risks that never happened, and for good reasons, against actual risks caused by war activities targeting conventional power plants that have materialised hundreds of times during this war.
But ahwell, keep hatin’on green I guess.
I don’t “hate greens”, I’m just saying “Greenpeace” have very different goals from protecting environment, especially that in 2019 they have voted in favour of extending coal in Germany until 2038, not to mention their subsidiary Greenpeace Energy trading Russian fossil gas in Germany.
@CanvasesByPeter @kravietz @greenpeace
@kravietz @Kerplunk @greenpeace
...and how many times has Ukraine come within a hair of a major nuclear disaster after the latest bombings? 10? 100? 1,000 times? It's only through sheer LUCK it hasn't happened.. Yet.
Of course if a solar panel is hit, you simply replace it, not evacuate the entire area for 50-500years
More like 500,000,000 years in the worst affected areas.
Russia is not hitting the Reactor Ruin because they can not control wind.
@Kerplunk I mainly said '50-500' because there are already people living back in the Chernobyl exclusion zone (a real-world example), but yes, depends on how big/bad the disaster will be.. And of course that simply wouldn't happen with Solar.