|
|
|
|
|
by ipdashc
22 days ago
|
|
I'm a big fan of solar but this seems like a stretch. Generating the same amount of power as one fossil fuel plant requires a vast amount of land area, so of course that's why people complain about it. Coal plants and mines can be pretty large but natural gas plants, the realistic alternative, are pretty compact. I'm not sure how the size of oil/gas fields compares to a similar amount of solar, but they are generally sited far away, where people don't see them - and can be built relatively visually unobtrusively (see LA). And then there's nuclear plants, pretty big, but putting out multiple gigawatts. Again, I think fossil fuels need to go and solar is our best bet, but no sense in hand waving the entire argument. They need a lot of land area. |
|
Lets not forget that it's not just the land the power plant sits on that is used by fossil fuels.
VAST areas are mined and drilled out