@Jym oh sure, but long run if you use solar it helps

Solar is worse than batteries

@banestrum I think it’s like 1 1/2 for the suburban

@Banana_soda long run?

Solar is kind of shit if you already have paid the infrastructure cost of a grid. It makes a lot of sense in Africa or parts of Asia where they haven't already paid the upfront cost of a grid.

The only viable power source is nuclear

@Jym eh, on individual houses it’s decent afaik

With a grid and modern reactors nuclear is decent.

As an individual persons choice, that is

Yeah, I like nuclear

Solar and wind power fuck up grid efficiency

@Jym you’re gonna have to give me a tldr sometime of how to get silly performance for cheap from a motorcycle because I was looking into getting one anyways, but don’t have a ton of money rn

@Antiboom There's not that much incentive with the way they sell it in my area, they offer to lease the equipment to you for no up front cost but you only get the full income from the panels after the lease is paid off via the electricity.

It's like a 30 year contract, screw that

@Antiboom

TL;DR a whole lot of time tuning and making mistakes as you optimize your ride.

I don’t mean for income, I mean for environmentalism

California gives a lot of incentive

@Jym right, guess I’ll look into it

If it's environmentalism then the best tech is already in use. It's not solar or nuclear though it's fracking.....

If you're an environmentalist and you live like every other American then you're hypocritical

America has met the Kyoto targets and is on track to meet Paris even though we never signedon to either.

There’s environmentalism and then there’s having enough money to reduce your environmental impact without sacrificing quality of life

@Jym how’s fracking environmentally friendly?

Or rather, what is it?

I don’t really know enough about it

google it

Won’t we still eventually run out of oil even with fracking

lol fracking is not good

it ruins the soils

even the more traditional mining methods are better

@Antiboom

OK this is a TL;Dr but still pretty long. We frack for oil mostly lite sweet crude. The process of hydrofracking off-gasses a lot of NatGas as a a *side effect*. The frackers don't have any real use for it and it's a pain to deal with because it's a gas and hard to store. The net outcome is that the cost of NatGas in the US is basically the transportation cost. Due to fracking we have the cheapest NatGas on the planet.

NatGas burns a lot cleaner than other fossil fuels and due to the low cost we have been able to afford new methods like dual-cycle reactors that make it even cleaner and more efficient (in petrochemical pollution is a synonym for waste and loss). This is why our reduction in carbon emissions makes us compliant to treaties we never signed.

@Achlys

That's physically impossible. For a frack to work it has to pressurize the system a mile under the water table. Seepage would prevent the frack from functioning.

It doesn't need pressure, just displacement

Don't speak retarded propaganda

No it requires pressure. To work you have to fracture the rock and release the hydrocarbons. A typical frack runs about 9000PSI.

To put that to scale high pressure steam is 75PSI and a commercial sandblaster is rated at 150PSI.

Fracking is better then being a slave to Saudi petro dollar shenanigans

^

Also being in a giant fracking state, the amount of nonsense i deal with from people who wont even go read current regulation is absolutely amazing

Or

We could just invade Saudi Arabia