Nuclear is the best btw.

      • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 days ago

        Solar panels kills birds.

        We already debunked wind turbines kill birds.

        The thing is, that yes, even windows kills birds.

        You know what kills birds 1.000 times more than all three combined?

        Cats.

        It’s an invented “discussion” to blame renewables. You don’t think oil&gas kills way way way way more?

        • Dæmon S.@calckey.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 days ago

          @Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com @Memes@lemmy.dbzer0.com

          See my other replies in this sub thread, where I’m explaining the nuances behind this matter.

          The thing is, that yes, even windows kills birds.

          I agree with you in this regard. Window panes are as reflective as solar panels. But then we humans tend to place solar farms where it used to be the habitat for wildlife because we humans can’t be bothered to have football fields worth of blue mirrors potentially reflecting sunlight towards apartments during specific moments of the day.

          Again, I’m not against PV, much to the contrary, it’s the best we have (after all, every type of energy source stems from solar energy under the hood, so why not siphon directly from the source?), but I’m the kind of person who tries to ponder about both sides of the coin, hence why (if you noticed) my initial comment wasn’t without ideas to solve this issue (making the panels vantablack, for example).

          You know what kills birds 1.000 times more than all three combined? Cats.

          Just like owls kills mice and small mammals with such an amazingly ruthless impetus, and…? Were talking about natural hunters doing instinctive hunting, a situation very different from our artificial apparata doing artificial harms to the environment, an environment of which predates our existence as the Homo sapiens species we are. Solar panels as we crafted these don’t naturally occur in Nature.

          It’s an invented “discussion” to blame renewables. You don’t think oil&gas kills way way way way more?

          Did you know two things can be true at once? I’m not saying oil and gas are harmless, much to the contrary. Perhaps you didn’t even read my whole comment where I said “some things buried by Mother Nature should stay buried”. I don’t mean to be rude but I suggest you read my initial comment again in all of its entirety.

          • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            There is no need for nuance when cats kill 1.000 times more mr “read my wall of text to blame renewables in some insignificant manner”.

            Also, you didn’t answer my question. But you’re not here for discussions I guess.

            • Dæmon S.@calckey.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 days ago

              @Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com @Memes@lemmy.dbzer0.com

              you didn’t answer my question

              Your only question in your earlier reply was “you don’t think oil and gas kills way way more?”, to which I replied with a counter-question about two things being true simultaneously, and then I said “I’m not saying oil and gas are harmless, much to the contrary”, recalling my earlier excerpt about things buried by Mother Nature, things of which, if you didn’t catch it initially, are oil (and by extension gas) as well as radioactive minerals (those containing uranium, plutonium, etc).

              So yes, I did answer your question.

              There’s no need for nuance when cats kill 1,000 times more

              So? What do you suggest we do with cats and how the heck could instinctive behavior, a behavior of which is found among species that predates us human, compare to artificially melting rocks and sand merged to mimick the naturally occurring photosynthesis in a very rough manner?

              Because I didn’t criticize PV just for the sake of it, I said several times how PV panels could benefit of having a vantablack surface that could absorb the most sunlight possible while reflecting the least specular light possible. Still you seem to be deliberately ignoring those parts from a content you dismissed as a “wall of text” (while you’re curiously accusing me of being unwilling to discuss).

              To blame renewables

              You just strawman-d a constructive critique of mine about photovoltaic panels (in which, again, I didn’t say “we should stop using PV”, for Goddess sake) to “blaming (all) renewables”, which I defy you to quote and point out the excerpt from my replies where I supposedly said that. If you can’t pinpoint the excerpt where I say something in the lines “we should stop using renewables” or “we should stop using PV”, then I gentle ask you don’t put words in my fingers that I didn’t wrote.