Submitted by kickresume t3_yq0n0i in dataisbeautiful
Staeff t1_ivnmo4d wrote
Reply to comment by 685327592 in More people are employed in clean energy than in fossil fuels by kickresume
I think this is more about that not phasing out fossils to protect jobs is not a valid argument, if renewables provide even more jobs..
taggedandgagged t1_ivoqt8g wrote
How about the fact that fossil fuels require many fewer jobs to provide the world with enough energy to sustain
vjx99 t1_ivoxzbf wrote
Yet they're still the cheaper form of energy production. Which means the money is going to workers instead of oligarchs.
taggedandgagged t1_ivoye2l wrote
No they are not? Wtf are you talkin about. They are much more expensive for the output you get
vjx99 t1_ivozabl wrote
[Renewables are now significantly undercutting fossil fuels as the world’s cheapest source of energy, according to a new report.
Of the wind, solar and other renewables that came on stream in 2020, nearly two-thirds – 62% – were cheaper than the cheapest new fossil fuel, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).
](https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/07/renewables-cheapest-energy-source/)
Staeff t1_ivoyt3p wrote
The required labor of renewables gets less over the lifetime of an installation as you don't need to keep a whole mining/drilling/shipping operation going to provide fuel.
But besides that what would it matter that you need more labor? As long as it's cheaper overall to produce renewable energy the number of jobs doesn't really mean anything.
taggedandgagged t1_ivoz1xf wrote
Its not cheaper overall and has so many more employees because of the necessary human labor to get anything within a magnitude of fossil fuel production. Or we could just go nuclear green and get over the shitty wind turbines already
Staeff t1_ivozdrt wrote
https://www.irena.org/publications/2022/Jul/Renewable-Power-Generation-Costs-in-2021
>The lifetime cost per kWh of new solar and wind capacity added in Europe in 2021 will average at least four to six times less than the marginal generating costs of fossil fuels in 2022.
>
>Globally, new renewable capacity added in 2021 could reduce electricity generation costs in 2022 by at least USD 55 billion.
>
>Between January and May 2022 in Europe, solar and wind generation, alone, avoided fossil fuel imports of at least USD 50 billion.
barlog123 t1_ivo5bi7 wrote
They can't just be jobs they need to be productive jobs that add value otherwise you're subsidizing waste and inefficiency
Staeff t1_ivo6hoe wrote
Look, I don't know what to tell you, renewables are already the cheapest way to produce energy in many countries and states and they have the benefit of not further advancing climate change, both of which adds value to the economy.
[deleted] t1_ivpofhb wrote
[deleted]
barlog123 t1_ivo6s41 wrote
How? They all have to be backed up with gas and coal because they're unreliable so it's renewable + gas/coal which isn't very green
Staeff t1_ivo6un7 wrote
Are you arguing that being fully fossil is more green than renewables with fossil backup?
barlog123 t1_ivo8uny wrote
Yeah, why not.
- The production and demand just shifts to other places so going green does very little in the grand scheme of things.
- Creates reliance on outdated unclean oil/gas/coal infrastructure and rouge nations especially in the case of an emergency.
- The net total reduction is minimalized by the need for backup until the battery tech is there.
Staeff t1_ivo9sbc wrote
If that's what you choose to tell yourself to rationalize not going green then please stick to it, you are beyond being argued with...
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments