Mike on Nostr: Not entirely true. Again another former life and a previous rabbit hole I've spent ...
Not entirely true.
Again another former life and a previous rabbit hole I've spent years down, which I'd prefer not to revisit, but no.
The TL;DR is:
Planet saving aside, fossil fuels are a one time use power source that will run out.
Until we reach a type 2 civilisation, we are required to harness energy indirectly from from the sun (the only source of power in our solar system).
Even nuclear fusion is technically burning stuff (or creating entropy) depending on your view point.
Where politics and agenda affect that first principles direction is that in the UK, wind is a far better, more efficient and reliable a power source than solar, but because of lobbyists and small scale inefficiencies of wind, solar has become the less efficient, but much more widespread adopted path.
This is wrong, but will still work along with nuclear fission and fusion of which I am directly involved from a previous life.
Again another former life and a previous rabbit hole I've spent years down, which I'd prefer not to revisit, but no.
The TL;DR is:
Planet saving aside, fossil fuels are a one time use power source that will run out.
Until we reach a type 2 civilisation, we are required to harness energy indirectly from from the sun (the only source of power in our solar system).
Even nuclear fusion is technically burning stuff (or creating entropy) depending on your view point.
Where politics and agenda affect that first principles direction is that in the UK, wind is a far better, more efficient and reliable a power source than solar, but because of lobbyists and small scale inefficiencies of wind, solar has become the less efficient, but much more widespread adopted path.
This is wrong, but will still work along with nuclear fission and fusion of which I am directly involved from a previous life.