grim buggo
Future Tech
Sort:
#27 agreed and wind turbines make the landscapes gross
Oct 12, 2024
0
#24
I used to dismiss geothermal as a small source only relevant in a small minority of places, but things have been changing recently. One interesting thing is combining it with lithium extraction, so the main cost of boring - a high expense - is justified by two things rather than just one.
Oct 12, 2024
0
#25
Fobby_Bischer1710 wrote:
#27 agreed and wind turbines make the landscapes gross
Wind turbines are beautiful, like giant moving statues that provide the energy for thousands of homes. I feel sorry for anyone who irrationally dislikes the small visual impact. I wouldn't be surprised if most people who object to them scarcely see one that is not in a photo.
I have them just a few km away from my city.
Oct 12, 2024
0
#27
fester_forever wrote:
The reality seems obvious for geothermal. We are sitting on a mini sun and ignoring the potential of a self energizing planet.
It's real, but it's kind of awkward. It used to only be considered feasible in volcanic regions. Elsewhere you need to dig very deep to find fairly hot rock (and then the temperature is quite low compared to other energy sources). Solar energy is everywhere and is of extremely high quality (the equivalent temperature is thousands of degrees). Wind energy is also very convenient.
But geothermal has the very nice feature of being 24/7. This is a strong selling point!
Interestingly, one of the most economic scalable ways to store intermittent energy is thermal storage. - heating a lot of mass, then keeping the heat for when you need it. You can think of geothermal as using the natural thermal storage deep in the Earth.
Oct 12, 2024
0
#28
Fobby_Bischer1710 wrote:
I have them just a few km away from my city.
That must be very traumatic for you. I am sure you will be looking to move somewhere less developed. Surely without any buildings, vehicles, lamp posts and other much larger visual impacts.
Oct 12, 2024
0
#29
fun fact: to solve the overcrowding problem, since it’s about 60-70°F 30 ft in the ground, we can make underground homes.
Oct 12, 2024
0
#30
LeafyLit wrote:
fun fact: to solve the overcrowding problem, since it’s about 60-70°F 30 ft in the ground, we can make underground homes.
Underground buildings are possible (and do exist). A downside is no window views. A bigger downside is that they are said to cost 20-30% more to build than normal buildings.
Oct 12, 2024
0
#32
#39 you can look up directly at the sun by a thing called …windows overlooking the goddam street- oh god I fumbled hard))
Oct 12, 2024
0
#34
The more common and cheaper solution to space problems is to add more floors. And you get windows.
I'd like to see humans live in giant million person buildings. We would only need 10,000 for the entire population.
Because the way we currently live is bad for the environment. The environment comes first,not humans.
#24 . . .