• 17 Posts
  • 102 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: September 29th, 2023

help-circle
  • The issue isn’t emissions, it’s costs. Sadly we don’t live in a dream world, and everything has a cost.

    Even running excess production into hydrogen production has costs (transport, storage, infrastructure…).

    The current (not taking in consideration the new tech currently in testing) beeing highly ineficient creates many cost issues.

    Less effieicnt means that more power needs to be used to get that amount of hydrogen, reducing the gains on electricity surplus.

    The storage beeing ineficient means a higher running cost, more space used, less of that space…

    The transport beeing ineficient also increases the running costs, but also the emissions if the transport uses fossil fuel. Of it uses hydrogen, well it increases the running cost even more. That expensive produced hydrogen is used for transport…

    The electricity production from hydrogen being ineficient increases the used hydrogen to get the same energy amount, which then increases the costs because more of that expensive hydrogen has to be used.

    So taking all this into account, being “clean” doesn’t necessarily make it is viable compared to other storage or energy production tech.

    The costs have to be taken in account because resources don’t appear magically.

    Mining Uranium has a cost. Buying it from abroad has a cost, paying people to maintain all that has a cost…



  • Well the issue with renewable power like wind and solar, is that they are not stable.

    Having a battery in order to store the energy and release it when the demand is higher than production is one part of the solution.

    But what happens when there wasn’t enough solar and wind to replenish the batteries if those batteries aren’t enough for the demand? Power shortages, which are pretty bad to get.

    One of the solutions to this is natural gas for a simple reason : it’s very fast to start generating power or to stop. It’s also not very expensive, at least when there isn’t a war… The co2 equivalent emissions aren’t as high as coal either.

    Nuclear power on the other hand is very hard to stop. Having a surplus of power on the grid is also very bad. Some of it could be used to recharge the batteries, but there would be some loss at some point.


  • Tibert@jlai.lutoLinux@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I convinced myself that manjaro is less stable than fedora. But not completely. It depends on the device and what is installed on it.

    For some reason, I was able to run Manjaro on my hp laptop without issues for a long time. However my brother on his Lenovo laptop, the manjaro update just killed itself after 2 months. And this always after some months the updater would not work anymore.

    I then installed Fedora on his laptop, and damn that thing stayed up and running for 2y now. Even after major system update, never broke, and package install always worked, at least when the tutorials are up to date on special things.

    Like installing video codecs, I had to do another command which was not mentioned on the fedora docs, in order to switch from ffmpeg libre to ffmpeg. And then the rest of the install commands would work.







  • One of your questions don’t seem to be that based?

    “shits on Linux gamers”, are you talking about the store not beeing available on linux? Meh already got heroic which is better.

    Their easy anticheat is available through proton tho, it’s on the game dev to chose to enable it or not (and I understand why they don’t do it for fortnite : the Linux market is pretty small, but also because the game is so huge that hackers will not hesitate a bit to switch to Linux in order to hack with custom kernels).