Comment on Debunking The "Dirty" Solar Panels And Battery Myth
TheWonderfool@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Nice article.
I feel though that, as many others, it compares the carbon footprint of production (panels and batteries) vs the footprint of burning only. By looking at the source of the carbon footprint, it seems that they take into account only the CO2 output of the energy factories, but extraction, transportation and storage has a non-negligible carbon footprint.
And they’re pretty big differences. Burning a cubic meter of natural gas produces 1.7kg of co2, but producing and transporting it adds another 0.3kg to that. (In the Netherlands, at least, ymmv).
For something like gasoline or diesel, co2 emissions from well to tank is something like a quarter of all emission.
They steel-manned the argument. They ignored the setup and supply of fossil fuels, while counting those for solar and battery, and even with giving the advantage to fossil fuels they showed solar and batteries both much better than fossil fuels
jonne@infosec.pub 10 months ago
Most of those comparisons are done in bad faith. As you said, they compare the whole chain for renewables/electric cars/windmills (parts of that chain could be decarbonised down the line anyway) to just the burning of the fuel, forgetting about extraction, exploration, transport and refining. Before you even get to the stage where you’re burning fuel in your engine, there’s been multiples of the CO2 and other greenhouse gases emitted already.