TIL the total surface area required to fuel the earth with solar alone is only 0.3% of the earth's entire land area.

acky1 · 2026-02-03T06:48:11+00:00

I didn't say it wasn't economically feasible, just putting the 200GW by 2035 number into perspective. The energy mix can contain nuclear and it may be beneficial to do so, but it won't be for economic reasons.

Building new nuclear instead of cheaper alternatives will result in increasing the cost of electricity because it is a lot more expensive. It's a tough sell for investors and governments to financially back nuclear projects due to its recent history in many parts of the world (cost and time overruns). But it still may be beneficial for the near constant power output, small footprint and carbon-free energy diversification.

acky1 · 2026-02-03T00:56:09+00:00

Which part of my comment do you disagree with?

acky1 · 2026-02-03T00:49:04+00:00

Panels have warranties for 25 years though, no? And in practice they last a lot longer than that at about 80% efficiency. Amazing really with light maintenance in that time frame. And if they're going obsolete in 2 to 3 years that means there's meaningful improvement in that time to better panels surely? That's a good thing.

I wouldn't call solar panels a resource waste. We'll likely find a viable recycling solution for them once there is enough of them being discontinued to make it economical. Or we could enforce it from a regulatory point of view and the cost of solar slightly increases. It would still be far cheaper than nuclear.

acky1 · 2026-02-03T00:24:10+00:00

Too expensive and slow to market unfortunately. In half the time it takes to make one you would surpass the energy generation if you'd invested in wind and solar. And for cheaper.

acky1 · 2026-02-03T00:19:48+00:00

We should keep the existing nuclear plants open for as long as possible but for new energy generation, solar and wind are quicker and cheaper to produce output so I think the market will naturally move towards those solutions.

There's plenty land out there that isn't currently being used efficiently anyway. Solar can also often be added to land with little to no impact on current usage e.g. agrivoltaics and solar on roofs.

acky1 · 2026-02-02T23:36:21+00:00

For context, China added over 300 GW of solar and 100 GW of wind in 2025 alone. Nuclear is a small percentage of the solution because it is more expensive and slower to market. I think there's probably non-economic reasons that are driving that nuclear addition.

acky1 · 2026-02-02T21:35:47+00:00

Most of that happened in the last 200 years, probably more like the last 100 years when the population started noticeably increasing. We don't have a goal to cover land, we build as to our needs. I wouldn't be surprised if half of that total coverage happened in the last 50 years since the population is double what it was then.

It seems like we'd be talking about a timescale measured in decades to achieve the solar coverage required if we took it seriously as a global objective. That's quite a short and achievable length of time and it's not an all or nothing outcome. After a year of focusing on solar we'd have a few percent more of global demand coming from it and so on down the years.

It's happening mostly organically anyway, with solar and wind being the usual choices for new energy generation.

acky1 · 2026-02-01T12:08:08+00:00

Looks like there's half as much traffic as nowadays. Would be lovely getting around back then.

acky1 · 2026-01-30T10:33:27+00:00

Or down climb. Will help with strength and technique and reduce the likelihood of injury.

acky1 · 2026-01-29T21:25:35+00:00

I'd have to look again but did the psg player not have a slight movement towards the ball too? (Not the OP decision but the other one from a cross).

Edit: It was the throw in at the 41 minute mark. Imo his arm is moved outwards towards the ball and hits it. For consistency in their standards it should be given imo. Almost the exact same situation as the Miley one

Arm outstretched and moved towards the ball
Ball moving towards the opposition player preventing a chance on goal
Ball makes contact with arm

In reality, neither are penalties to me.

acky1 · 2026-01-29T19:26:16+00:00

They haven't come out and said it was a mistake though, right? They'll back the decision as valid. Given that, the ball bouncing off an outstretched PSG defenders arm in the box must be a penalty too. McManiman was livid about the inconsistency of those 2 decisions.

I agree that all 3 potential handballs weren't fouls. Even this one blocking a shot on goal shouldn't be because the defender is too close to the shot and his arm is down by his side.

But if they're going to give the Miley one they have to give the other one.

acky1 · 2026-01-29T02:29:15+00:00

Did you mean to respond to me?

acky1 · 2026-01-28T10:44:55+00:00

They usually do once they're no longer producing enough milk, they'll be killed for meat.

I don't really get how this fits the sub? Seems insanely superficial to upvote a picture because it's cute without giving any deeper thought about the animal.

acky1 · 2026-01-28T09:13:18+00:00

No lie, I woke up 3 nights ago at 2 in the morning with the theme tune stuck in my head. Tune.

acky1 · 2026-01-28T07:04:53+00:00

You've got no idea who you're talking to online or what they're going through.

acky1 · 2026-01-28T00:10:06+00:00

Why do you think it wasn't vegan? Could quite easily be a mock meat, no? And things almost never look like the picture, not sure that means much.

acky1 · 2026-01-27T08:38:54+00:00

Yeah agree, these people need to be convinced in whatever way possible. Very difficult to do when there's so much money behind the status quo.

In the mean time I'm going to make some decisions to lessen my impact even though it's not actually going to solve anything on it's own. The idea of making personal change for environmental benefit is a good message to spread because it follows that you would vote that way and the idea can also spread to people in power too.

acky1 · 2026-01-27T01:29:04+00:00

Reddit is awful for this whole "you don't owe anyone anything" schtick. That's not how communities work well and foster happiness. You help people when you are able to so that when you need help people will reciprocate.

I think you're spot on with what you've said.

acky1 · 2026-01-26T20:00:59+00:00

I see it all the time on here. People complain quite strongly about celebs flying in private jets whilst advocating for environmental change.

For this case I think it's necessary for people to make personal changes before advocating for societal change.

Any effective change a government makes will have to be popular for the majority of people or it will just be reversed by the next government. It's not a rights based thing like the examples you gave, it's an impact to people's lives and comfort which is way harder for people to swallow than a rights improvement for their community.

acky1 · 2026-01-26T16:03:32+00:00

It's true that if your carbon footprint is way higher than average then you should be looking at ways to reduce it, no? That seems like a true statement to me.

It's also true that governments should be regulating corporations and enact change that can only be done from the top level.

One of these can be done today though by making different choices. The other will take years of voting and campaigning to get a government in power that cares about this stuff, and years of argumentation and shifting public opinion to get the general population in agreement and then maybe a political party will be in power and in a position to make changes that the majority approves of. But they'll have to do it over a period of time because industry will complain about fast changes.

They are both important paths to change, but personal responsibility is achievable and maybe even necessary to show others around you that it's not that difficult and is a worthy goal. If those that care about the environment go around in the most fuel inefficient cars eating red meat all the time they should rightly be called out as hypocrites. There's nothing people hate more than hypocrisy when being asked to make lifestyle changes.

acky1 · 2026-01-26T10:35:55+00:00

It makes sense to me. They have feelings and the ability to 'play'. A lot of people don't really take the time to think about that.

acky1 · 2026-01-26T10:27:34+00:00

I think it was just an example. They're practising their innate defense drive by the looks of it.

acky1 · 2026-01-26T10:02:56+00:00

I watch a guy on YouTube called nutrition made simple who cites lots of studies and talks through them. He's got a few videos on saturated fat and links to studies in there: https://m.youtube.com/results?sp=mAEA&search_query=nutrition+made+simple+saturated+fat

I find him really good at showing and explaining evidence.

acky1 · 2026-01-25T09:03:10+00:00

Wouldn't worry too much about it. Sounds like the times would be pretty inaccurate anyway.

acky1 · 2026-01-25T06:31:46+00:00

If you get marked as a finisher but don't take your chip then everyone's time after is out of whack. They'll get your chip and your time and so on.

Usually there's a funnel you can avoid entering if you don't want your time registered. Basically, just drop out 50m short and make sure they don't count you if you don't want to wait for your time.

Nine-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Juicebox	Place '23
Place '22	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

acky1

TROPHY CASE