Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You can't be worried about fracking and coal at the same time in the US. The former is the reason for the latter's demise
 help



You can. It's not because fracking has displaced coal that it's overall a net benefit (I know it is somewhat true for climate change, I don't have an informed opinion concerning environmental pollution) and it's what should have happenned.

For example either renewables + batteries or nuclear could have displaced coal. Just because there wasn't enough money/political support for it doesn't mean that we shouldn't worry about both fracking and coal usage consequences.


Yeah, on a long enough timeline we should be moving away from fossil fuels as much as possible, but in the meantime fracking has allowed us to substantially lower carbon emissions without massive societal upheaval. It's like equating hybrid cars with traditional ICE vehicles. Sure they both have problems, but one has a lot fewer.

And no, renewables + batteries and nuclear couldn't have displaced coal precisely due to a lack of money and political support. Why are those constraints any less important? The goal isn't just to build renewable tech, the goal is to build a functional society that uses renewable tech. There also is a technological constraint here, fracking became viable in the early 2000s before modern battery and solar tech existed at its current price point.


Why shouldn’t one be able to worry about 2 bad things at the same time?

wow that's the most repeat fallacy, I even see in political commercials now

we don't use domestic oil, we sell it overseas

and oil until pop-up "ai" datacenters was not used for power production

you are thinking about solar and wind power for coal's demise

which now they are also defunding, even worse reusing the funds for coal investment


No, but we get so much natural gas as a side effect of the fracking that we literally can't distribute it all, it's effectively free. Which is why natural gas plants have been displacing coal plants for the last 20 years.

You... really need to read more before forming your opinions


Solar and wind subsidies have been illegally halted, and are the subject of ongoing litigation.

Solar and wind are commercially viable and provide about 30% of the electrical energy in Texas. Around 50% of California's daytime electrical energy is provided by solar and wind power. New projects are typically hamstrung by transmission permitting constraints.

While subsidies would help substantially, they aren't a necessary condition for continued adoption of renewable energy sources. Storage is probably the next big hurdle to displace fossil fuels once there's sufficient progress with transmission.


No, really, when the fracking boom hit, it was so much cheaper than coal that it made a large dent in the coal industry for energy production. Solar and wind expansion have been far slower to roll out nationwide, but fracking was an almost overnight expansion of gas power production at that time.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: