This has always been the case. There is a specific way that congress can put a check on POTUS. Liberals being told how the government works and has always worked, and suddenly getting upset. I’m sure they will vote harder then they have ever voted before to fix it this time.

Full communism now.

Sure high-speed rails with HVDC lines powering them from coast-to-coast I’m here for it.

Energy density has been the number one most important factor since humans started using metal. Wood is good enough to smelt bronze, and with some refinement can get your iron, but not good enough for steel. Steel requires coal, and with some refinement steel is what our world is built on.

Fossil fuels allow cars, planes and more efficient trains and boats. Unless we somehow start utilizing uranium and transuranics electric airplanes are for grifters. Uranium and it’s derivatives are the only thing we have harnessed that even approaches the energy density of fossil fuels.

I’m a network engineer and I run ipv6 natively in all of our datacenters. There are even a handful of end systems that have ipv6 native networking stacks with ipv4 sockets for our non-ipv6 compatible applications. IPv6 issues are basically self-inflicted at this point by companies that see their IT systems as cost centers, or by basilisk directors who’s knowledge stopped in the 90’s.

Obviously this won’t be a problem once AI becomes self-aware. /s

That’s the point. Obviously having an ever expanding underclass that can be exploited with no risk is preferable to paying workers more.

If the labor force could opt out of the rat race because they didn’t have to work, then they gives them immense power especially considering what they have now. Of course the necessities would have to be controlled in a not-for-profit manner so that you can’t just have some land baron that adjusts the cost of rent and food upward to ensure it eats up all the UBI, same with utilities/internet/etc.

But for consumerist goods that people want because they enhance life, if people could realistically withhold their labor unless the capitalist offered equity etc in industries that produced those things, you would quickly see the power of the leaders of those industries wane significantly.

This is a false dichotomy. Employers can’t find the staff they need at the wages they are willing to pay. Immigrants are the scapegoat, not the solution.

Same. But for me I rented it on Genesis. Had no fucking clue what was going on and didn’t really have a good time.

Seems novel. But from a security aspect, if OpenSSH has security vulnerability that allows an unauthenticated user to login, via whatever means, once you are in the system as a non-privileged user, you are now free to use the same vulnerability to get root.

Basically this exercise is like using two locks that have the same key to open them. If the same key opens them, then a weakness in one, is now a weakness in the other so why bother with two identical locks?

We wouldn’t bother with independent motorized transportation. It would be trains for between cities and public transit so ubiquitous that bikes would be exiled strictly for rural exploration outside of cities.

Don’t be too hard on entity’s that have zionist bias’ as Zionism and propaganda surrounding Israel has been ever-present since at LEAST the 1950’s in America, and similar in Europe.

The gamergate clickbait is still alive and well I see.

You’d be wrong then.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Verde_Nuclear_Generating_Station This is a Nuclear power plant in the middle of a desert so no large bodies of water near by, though obviously the design could be adapted to places where water was more plentiful.

It takes up 4000 acres (16,000,000 sq meters) Produces (not stores) 4GW (~32,000 GWHrs annually) For comparison, the US Produces 42400000 GWhrs annually. And it cost $14Billion in 2023 dollars

If I were to replace all of the US’s generating capacity with nuclear, fully shunning renewables. it would cost ~$19Trillion and take up 5.3million acres (which is the minimum amount of land that could be taken up by any currently existing power generation system https://ourworldindata.org/land-use-per-energy-source ). But no one wants to do that (although it would be amazing for the atmosphere). Instead we merely need to supplement renewables with base-load power, and we don’t actually need power storage at all.

The ideal ratio between renewable power and base-load power I do not know. But during the day in Texas in July it’s about 50% higher then at night. https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=42915

So even if we assume renewables don’t work at night, base-load only needs to account for ~33% of total electric production at the worst case. Much more manageable then the ~6.5hrs/6TWhrs of energy storage required for a 100% renewable grid to function.

The tl;dr, is that while renewable powered storage is possible, the magnitude of storage required to eliminate base-load generation is VASTLY larger then anti-nuclear advocates realize, and not feasible today (or possibly ever). This belief stems from is fossil fuel propaganda, especially in Germany where the fossil fuel interests understand they have nothing to fear from renewables because a renewable heavye grid is only possible with fossil fuel plants and every year every nation burns more fossil fuels then they did the year before*, Germany included. It will stay that way until mass famine hits and the human population of the earth collapses, unless we stop burning fossil fuels. The only viable non-fossil fuel replacement for our large and growing baseload capacity is nuclear power.

*note that fossil fuels aren’t only used for energy production, transportation and shipping are huge areas as well.

It may not need to wear a red shirt, nor a blue shirt… If you hear fascism is on the rise and you think “Maga” you are naive.

Unfortunately your rough math misses a lot of the picture. This is where the gotcha comes in.

https://electrek.co/2022/10/19/the-worlds-largest-single-phase-battery-is-now-up-and-running/

That is a currently realized grid storage facility, the largest and really only one of it’s kind. Today’s renewables do not do storage at all, they rely on fossil fuels to make up the baseload.

Some numbers. This facility stores 1400MWh, on 2,000 acres or (~8,000,000 sq meters) Much greater then your 40,000sq meter estimate. Plus you said about 33GWh for a day. Well you’d need ~24 of these facilities to cover just Berlin.

So now the big question, how much energy storage will be needed in a >90% renewable grid? It’s obviously a difficult question based on a lot of factors, but one such estimate I found here: https://www.pv-magazine.com/2022/01/24/us-zero-carbon-future-would-require-6twh-of-energy-storage/ ~6TWhrs for the US or about 4300 of those facilities.

Yes it wouldn’t have to be monolithic like that facility is, but regardless of how you distribute it, it’s a non-trivial amount of space taken up. Totally ignoring the costs, and sourcing the materials for the batteries of such facilities.

But just for fun that facility was ~$550M So you’d need to spend about $2.3T for the initial building of that storage.

Wind and sun will always supply a base level of energy.

That is objectively false. The sun doesn’t shine at night, and wind doesn’t blow 100% of the time. So logically there is some amount of time that you do not get a base load provided only by sun and wind. Hence the need for storage at all. And yes it is a gotcha question, because it’s something that anti-nuclear people hand-wave away as if the significant storage infrastructure to support a 100% renewable is just a rounding error, and not worth thinking about.

It’s just an example number. No matter what if you are building a grid that has 0 baseload power generation, you need some amount of storage capacity for each KWh of consumption. We can argue how much you actually need, but the fact remains that when you start storing large amounts of power, which you would need in-order to keep a city running during times of reduced generation, it takes a large amount of space.
In order to demonstrate that, I chose a pretty straight-forward scenario of a city of 1million for just one day. Let’s assume that this amount of stored energy would be sufficient for a 100% renewable grid for say New York City.

So how much energy storage would be needed and how much space would such a storage facility take up?

How big would a battery need to be to power a single city of 1000000 for 1day?