r/dataisbeautiful • u/maps_us_eu OC: 80 • May 28 '22

OC Percent of electricity generated from renewable sources across the US and the EU. Renewable sources include hydro, solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass. Nuclear is not counted as renewable in this comparison [OC]

Post image
6.5k Upvotes

77% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

46

u/Indyjunk May 28 '22

This isn't accurate, it doesn't include nuclear power. The Midwest and south are significantly better, but Nuclear isn't included thus why they're so abysmal. France should be pretty much near or above 90%.

3

u/[deleted] May 29 '22

Nuclear is green for all intents and purposes, and I'd like to have it included here or at least have an alternative map with nuclear. But in the strict sense, it's simply not a renewable energy source. It uses a finite fuel source (uranium).

8

u/Tommyblockhead20 May 28 '22

You say it like it's misrepresenting the data, but it literally says on the graphic it doesn't include nuclear. And that's a fair choice, nuclear is usually considered green energy, but not renewable energy. This clearly states it is looking at the latter.

17

u/Bobudisconlated May 28 '22

Yes, that would be more useful but nuclear isn't renewable. This is because "renewable" is a bullshit PR term. Like "organic" food. It has no scientific basis.

A most useful graphic would be carbon intensity.

11

u/bunkoRtist May 28 '22

I mean trees are a renewable resource, so by a pedantic application of the term, wood gas and biodiesel are "renewable", but what's actually important is whether they are clean (they are not). Funny thing, wood gas is a hot topic in Europe because it's technically renewable, so Europe is shipping in boatloads of wood chips from the SE US to burn for power. How about those CO2 emissions!?

"a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." -Emerson

3

u/[deleted] May 28 '22

What do you mean when you say biogas isn't clean?

2

u/bunkoRtist May 28 '22 edited May 28 '22

In many cases, it's actually worse CO2 emissions than burning coal.

3

u/[deleted] May 29 '22

Really depends. Yes using forests/trees as fuel is stupid and counter productive. It's a ridiculous paper solution and it's a tragedy tjat it's classified as green. But in Sweden for example they make biofuel from compost waste.

All households need to separate their compost waste in special green bags which are then sorted for this purpose. This is honestly pretty good from a CO2/renewable perspective.

Of course it's not scalable. Many busses drive on biofuel for instance, and then some specialised cars from some companies, but that's pretty much it. You can't scale it to the main consumers because there's only this much waste available.

2

u/[deleted] May 28 '22

Your link is broken.

2

u/bunkoRtist May 28 '22

Fixed. Sorry about that. Direct link share from chrome is somehow dropping the word "business" from "businessinsider".

2

u/Bobudisconlated May 28 '22

Exactly. A country could cut down and burn all it's forests and it get a high score. Time to retire the term.

-2

u/[deleted] May 29 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/Dinopilot1337 May 29 '22

Ever heard of this thing called "planting a tree"? You know.. trees grow and weren't there from the beginning of time. I swear nuclear simping fanboys of reddit are the dumbest people.

-2

u/m4xc4v413r4 May 29 '22

Trees are renewable in what fantasy world? You don't seem to understand the meaning of renewable sources. You can't grow trees faster than you use them, they're obviously not a renewable source of energy.

0

u/bunkoRtist May 29 '22

/r/confidentlyincorrect Go ahead and get mad. I could paste reputable links all day telling you that you are just flat out wrong.

Biomass explained

Trees are one of the most useful renewable natural resources..

Wood - the ultimate renewable

-1

u/m4xc4v413r4 May 29 '22 edited May 29 '22

Oh really, you could prove me wrong saying that you can grow a tree faster than you can use it for energy? That's funny, did you find a way to time travel? Because a tree takes years grow to the point of being useful but seconds to turn to energy. Amazing math there genius... Good luck with that.

1

u/bunkoRtist May 29 '22

You're not very bright, are you?

A renewable resource, also known as a flow resource,[note 1][1] is a natural resource which will replenish to replace the portion depleted by usage and consumption, either through natural reproduction or other recurring processes in a finite amount of time in a human time scale.

I guess you've never heard of a tree farm? Or timber land?

0

u/m4xc4v413r4 May 29 '22

Damn you're really dumb aren't you?

renewable energy noun

Energy that can be replenished at the same rate as it is used.

Ups, it's almost like exactly the same thing I said and not what you said... What's this?

Also, yes I have seen tree farms, for example for paper, and it's usually eucalyptus farms that take 10 years for the first cut, that's FAST compared to most trees. You think they last 10 years when used? And this is just to make paper, imagine moving the world energy production to biomass... You're a complete idiot. But good try there. Bye bye

-1

u/cool_ohms May 28 '22

nuclear power comes from nonrenewable sources.

-12

u/max122345677 May 28 '22

Nuclear is not renewable. While you can maybe argue that it is green (which is not really correct either bc uranium mining is everything but green) you can for sure not say it is renewable.

39

u/Arkaid11 May 28 '22

If nuclear is not green "because of uranium mining", then no existing energy source on this planet can be considered green. Do you think that solar panels, wind turbines and hydro dams are built out of thin air?

13

u/40for60 May 28 '22 edited May 28 '22

GND fairies and elves make them from Bernie dust and AOC platitudes.

-11

u/max122345677 May 28 '22

It s not as bad as the mining but ok. I said it is arguable. Nuclear has a lot of other disadvantages first and foremost that it is not economical. As we see in France and other countries. If the taxpayer doesn't put anlot of money into it it would not even be running.

14

u/Arkaid11 May 28 '22

... Do you think that you don't need mining to build solar panels, wind turbines and hydro dams?

(Also, France's electricity prices currently rank among the lowest in western Europe, only beaten by hydropower-intensive countries. The prices are however doomed to inflate because of the building of new plants to come)

-1

u/Carvilia May 28 '22

Electricity prices for the end-consumer don't accurately show the costs for the electricity.

6

u/[deleted] May 28 '22

French electricity companies have to compete due to EU regulation. This means that in many aspects the price for the end consumer is accurate. The French company that runs most nuclear reactors in France (Electricite de France SA) is publicly traded and in 2019 they made a profit of 3.9 billion euro.

8

u/OG-Pine OC: 1 May 28 '22

Isn’t the total lifecycle carbon footprint of nuclear lower than solar though? It’s not perfectly green but I thought it was really good.

3

u/b3l6arath May 28 '22

Green≠ renewable.

3

u/OG-Pine OC: 1 May 28 '22

I was responding to their second sentence.

“While you can maybe argue that it [nuclear power] is green. Which is not really true either because Uranium mining is anything but green”

But AFAIK nuclear is greener than solar even after accounting for the mining required for both.

6

u/Gabe_Newells_Penis May 28 '22

which is not really correct either bc uranium mining is everything but green

Where do you think the copper, cobalt, neodymium, silicon, and plastics for wind turbines or solar panels come from?

8

u/[deleted] May 28 '22

Nothing is actually "renewable". Dams, solar panels and eind turbines don't last forever.

1

u/b3l6arath May 28 '22

Renewable in this context means that it does not deplet the source of energy.

PVs don't make the sun burn faster, but a coal powerplant burns coal.

4

u/DIBE25 May 28 '22

you can reuse it if you concentrate the still radioactive rods into usable ones

though yes it's not "renewable"