jesus fucking christ. if this study truly is accurate, if we shut down just 5% of the worst offending power plants across the globe that would reduce the carbon output of electrical generation by 75%
@radicalrobit this is why I get upset when people suggest turning off the lights when you leave the room
@Thomas That... I think I've only ever heard that in the context of not driving up the electric bill. Is it really a suggestion for driving down emissions?
I mean, I guess if everyone did it, the result would be that less power would need to be produced, so it's not completely irrational, but that does seem kind of silly when we know that Canada, for example, will charge citizens for not using ENOUGH power.
@QuLyo yeah, I was just using it as an example of how politicians and the fossil fuel industry have successfully moved the onus of reducing emissions to the individual rather than themselves. “Don’t idle your car” is probably a better example.
@seachaint @QuLyo the point is not that it’s good, it’s that making a significant reduction to carbon emission is the responsibility of energy producers and the fossil fuel industry and putting the onus on the consumer is the same as that “ah, you hate capitalism but you own an iPhone” meme. I have to own a car because of the distance between my home and work and lack of public transport, there is no other choice. I remote start my car in my driveway because it’s frequently over 100° here.
@seachaint @QuLyo they aren’t going to shut down that 5% or worst offending power plants or improve them through regulation because the power of capital is too strong a motivator. As long as it’s more profitable to operate those plants the amount of carbon they’re spewing into the atmosphere is a negligible concern to the operators.
@gunchleoc @radicalrobit this attitude of “do your best and hope the big polluters stop” has lead to the hottest years on record and unchecked emissions. I’m not saying turning your A/C down isn’t valuable but only in as much as it reduces the overall output of a power plant which, unless everyone is on board (and they are not) is negligible. I’m pointing fingers because large producers are not doing their part and until they do, reducing power usage does not amount to a significant change.
@gunchleoc @radicalrobit we have what? 10 years to halve our emissions or raise the temp another 1°? Do you think enough people will start unplugging their phone chargers in that time to matter? Do you think domestic power usage has been a major contributor to CO2 emissions compared to specifically the plants in the OP? This is why that kind of rhetoric bothers me. The onus should not be on the consumer. I have to use power, I have to drive a car.
@radicalrobit I write about power, including plants, and yes, this is true. A lot of coal capacity has shut down in the past few decades. We are left with not too much. To a degree, we are "decentralizing" pollution into more numerous, less polluting gas plants. But yeah, we are within striking distance of phasing out coal.
@radicalrobit A couple of considerations in response to that article’s recommendations for mitigation:
Natural gas has huge problems with fugitive emissions - which rapidly increase carbon footprint due to the global warming potential of methane - and I don’t know if their data is accounting for that. (One problem with that is that the fugitive emissions are so hard to accurately measure.)
CCS hasn’t been practical to date.
@radicalrobit (essentially what I’m saying here is that retrofitting these inefficient plants with some of the technologies mentioned isn’t going to be as helpful as claimed, and I agree with you about shutting them down instead. replace them with renewables, storage, demand response, and efficiency improvements elsewhere.)
Welcome to laserdisc.party, a movie-flavoured instance home to friendly video store chitchat and general bonhomie.