Share
43,160 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 642
clock Created with Sketch.
23/05/24
15:55
Share
Originally posted by rememdium:
↑
I had a brief scan of the article and came across this -"But the environmental argument should also consider other factors, such as preserving the local natural environment. Land-intensive energy sources (e.g. wind and solar) will perform worse in this regard than technologies with a smaller footprint (e.g. coal and nuclear)." One thing they state quite clearly in the article is the other side is cherry picking data and then they throw out a comment like this without taking into consideration the land that is required to mine the resources these power plants use. Just leaves a bad taste in your mouth once you read something like that. There all the same. They only highlight what they want you to read.
Expand
and CSG has an even much larger land footprint. not only does it occupy large swathes of land, but it poisons the land, subterranean waters, causes leaks in the rock allowing fugitive methane emissions and many other disastrous problems, No to CSG