this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2025
148 points (85.9% liked)

Technology

61234 readers
6394 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s
enu
technopagan
L4s
148
A massive battery fire in California could cast a dark shadow on clean energy expansion (www.fastcompany.com)
submitted 4 days ago by RememberTheApollo_ to c/technology
69 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Days before President Donald Trump returned to the Oval Office and took actions to stall the transition to clean energy, a disaster unfolded on the other side of the country that may have an outsize effect on the pace of the transition.

A fire broke out last Thursday at the Moss Landing Energy Storage Facility in California, one of the largest battery energy storage systems in the world. The fire raged through the weekend, forcing local officials to evacuate nearby homes and close roads.

Battery storage is an essential part of the transition away from fossil fuels. It works in tandem with solar and wind power to provide electricity during periods when the renewable resources aren’t available. But lithium-ion batteries, the most common technology used in storage systems, are flammable. And if they catch fire, it can be difficult to extinguish.

Last week’s fire is the latest and largest of several at the Moss Landing site in recent years, and I expect that it will become the main example opponents of carbon-free electricity use to try to stop battery development in other places.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, not gonna write a big reply to this.

If your that strict, nothing is green. Its about minimizing the impact. And you forgot to mention the mining of uranium.

Wind energy impacts birds.

Please compare the impact to housecats, cars and agriculture.

[–] rottingleaf 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Hydroelectric energy is worse than burning coal. It's not being strict, it's being adequate.

Housecats are a catastrophe, cars - not so much, agriculture - modern agriculture can have little impact for very good output.

We started with nuclear energy which is greener than solar panels and wind turbines. It still is.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Hydroelectric energy is worse than burning coal. It's not being strict, it's being adequate

[Citation required]

Housecats are a catastrophe, cars - not so much, agriculture - modern agriculture can have little impact for very good output.

All are way bigger than windturbines. And the biggest is habit loss, which is mainly driven by agriculture.

[–] rottingleaf 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

If citations are required for my truisms, then citations are also required for your bullshit.

So - you start first, cause I'm lazy.

And the biggest is habit loss, which is mainly driven by agriculture.

Modern intensive agriculture is better for this particular kind of damage than hydroelectric energy, wind turbines and solar panel farms.

Not using facts, but using logic:

Space where wind turbines work becomes dangerous (as in uninhabitable) for a lot of life, not just birds being killed or their migrations affected by disorientation, but also seeds carried by wind. Same with solar panels - plants need sunlight, animals need plants, soil needs plants. Same with hydroelectric energy - by changing whole watersheds it incurs such enormous damage to existing ecosystems that a Chernobyl or two every decade is better, and humans don't bother much about creating and maintaining new ones.

While with modern agriculture one may make a lot of things closed from the surrounding environment, occupying only space.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Yeah, you're lazy and wrong,

https://pure.iiasa.ac.at/id/eprint/6784/1/RR-03-05.pdf, Fig 8

Not using facts,

True

but using logic:

You mean pulling stuff out of your ass?

not just birds being killed or their migrations affected by disorientation,

Not true

but also seeds carried by wind

Wtf?

that a Chernobyl or two every decade is better

Wtf???

Start bringing some sources