What does /pol/ think about Green Economy? Is it the future?
>>72226996
No, poverty is never the solution
>>72227176
You need $$ and a job to buy Tesla.
>>72227610
Why would I buy a car, when I have truck that is more spacious, has a range of 400 miles and has 4wd?
>>72228061
I just assumed you weren't broke.
Of course it is. If you don't think so you're just being an edgy contrarion.
Smart investors are betting on green technology with their dollars, that's all you really need to know.
>>72226996
>green economy
That means electricity
which means you need to produce a shit ton more electricity
which means more nuclear power plants, more solar meme panels, and a fuck ton more coal
which means the only thing you are doing is pretending to be "green"
>>72228528
You can't just make up your own definition.
>>72228738
Then tell me what "green" is
>>72228919
https://greeneconomygroup.com/company/green-economy-definition/
>>72229060
Yea, its a bunch of bullshit.
You can't churn out enough energy to support the amount of people on earth.
>>72228325
I am not..also I not a cuck like you norgay
>>72229319
t.feelings
>>72226996
Maybe, but with current low oilprice the green economy is getting delayed. + major oil and coal firms is often buying green patents.
With the oil and gas reserves getting smaller and smaller more firms will start to do something with their green patents.
>>72229823
Go celebrate black history month with your homo truck.
>>72229060
Stop importing from China first.
>>72229851
>powering all of the US from a single point
o-okay anon
>>72231569
It's a visual example. Don't be so desperate.
>>72229851
>put solar panels in africa
>niggers destroy and steal it
it LITERALLY even happened before
>>72226996
Nope,
I travel between cities all the time, distances from 150 to 450 miles. I need to go Friday evening, do my work, and come home on Sunday.
Electric cars just do not offer this range, 125 miles tops, and their capabilities diminish quickly like laptop batteries.
>>72229851
Do you even know how solar power works?
Surface area isn't even an issue.
> Who the fuck brings it up? ...apart from those trying to shift the debate to a false issue.
> The environmental impact of nukes is bad
> But hey look at all this other surface area guys!
How does it get to where it is needed?
How is it stored EFFICIENTLY.
How do shipping boats run on electric?
How do HGVs run on electric?
How do planes run on electric?
Fuel = power
So how is this "area required to power the world?"
> The stupidity of the world is getting to me sorry
>>72229851
This is literally retarded.
Look up power consumption.
Look up land area.
Look up wattage per sq ft output form solar panels.
Solar does not work on the night side (-50%), under clouds (-33%), both factors multiply surface area required. Realize they do not work in areas with sand storms or blizzards.
Hint, you would need to cover most of North America's grasslands and forests in them just to power the US.
How green. Liberals literally suggest creating vast swaths of wasteland to go green.
Go watch the Musk's Powerwall debut video for the amount of land needed to be covered by solar panels to power the entire USA. It's tiny
>>72226996
They look fucking gay and I like owning a car im capable of working on that doesnt track my movement.
>>72232338
>>72232666
You both took the post out of context. It was a reply too >>72229319
>>72228528
> Nuclear
Problem solved. The infrastructure is already in place, even the device I used to post this was charged from 70% nuclear energy.
>>72226996
it's a symbol of western hypocrisy, where we ban all the polluting industries from our country and turn around and sign trade deals with china so we may feel morally superior while they do all the pollution
>>72233011
OK. I agree that the anon you were replying to didn't really put a good case foward.
But it being a "reply" doesn't mean its out of the context of reality friend.
What is YOU information about?
If you are "pro-green energy" you need to look into the arguments you are making or the systems you are advocating the implementation of.
>>72233665
No one has denied the obstacles. That is one of the main reasons why i made this thread. What do you think about a Green Economy? Besides the picture i used as an example.
>>72228528
It also means reforestation, efficient buildings and leaning the market to being more environmentally friendly/ connected in general.
Don't disagree with "green" things out of spite toward the parasites that try and own it. (you know like liberal vegans and communist spiritual types)
Just treat it as a separate issue or try to own it yourself.
>>72234118
You and OP shouldn't be here. You guys are okey.
