How We Solved Renewables BIGGEST Problem

Do you think these advances in recycling are moving us closer to the closed loop ideal? Take your personal data back with Incogni! Use code UNDECIDED at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: http://incogni.com/undecided

Corrections:
01:50 – Silver tripled in demand, not price.

If you liked this, check out Why This Ultra Cheap Battery Breakthrough Matters https://youtu.be/qZ8z5tFzuIw?list=PLnTSM-ORSgi7uzySCXq8VXhodHB5B5OiQ

The VAST amount of solar panels being retired are still fully functional, they're just being replaced for panels with far higher output. It should be an absolute no-brainer for these old, functional panels to be donated to developing countries.
Looks like a non-profit is waiting to be spun up; the "Disposer" pays a fee which is used to establish the old panels on schools and community projects in developing countries. The lower output of older panels is less of an issue as the developing countries tend to have lower power requirements e.g. mobile phones and led lights.

Great show!

13:40 I think it would be better to focus on nuclear fission. Traditional, tried and true, absolutely safe, lowest number of deaths associated with emissions, etc, etc. There is not a phyisical limitation that stops us from building gigawatt plants in a project time of 5 years or les, it's a regulation problem. And if we speak of Small Modular Reactors, it is literally an assembly line in a factory.

I have 3 questions/theories, whatever you call it.
1) Every joule of energy we "burn" goes into heat. Be that Geologically produced Methane – sorry, it's not dino juice. It comes from the decomposition of rocks. Change my mind. Be that nuclear fission, or solar panels.
2) The Albedo Effect. It's commonly claimed that a "Sahara desert of solar panels would power the world." It's also claimed that ice melting would cause an exponential rise in absorbed energy from the sun. This is because now you have a dark ocean absorbing sunlight energy versus ice/snow reflecting it. The exact same thing would happen in a desert with sand versus dark solar panels.
3) The "greenhouse gases" of burning Methane and Coal (comes from rocks or trees, not dinosaurs) are more deleterious because they "trap" and reflect the heat back down to the surface. The argument is that you burn it once to make a battery and solar panel that then doesn't produce on-going. I get the argument. I am not sure that I agree. It comes down to the reliability. If a solar panel lasted 300 years or a wind turbine didn't need maintenance as often and also, lasted 300 years of service, maybe.
What is the effect on the environment and more importantly, Humans that breath the smoke, when a lithium battery station catches fire.
Are we still breaking even?

That doesn't even cover the labor problems associated with mining and factories in other countries.

It's a good goal. But we are FAILING! Just use fission.

So much work for what is nothing more than a backup for real energy production… Maybe we should be spending our time, money and effort on something that generates enough energy to actually replace fossil fuels?

It will be better if you stop following the ALGORITHM

Maybe the best of the many great videos that you have produced. Thanks

You said something at the tail end of the video which turns out to be INCREDIBLY problematic: "A cradle to grave perspective is a crucial part of that."

Inarguably true, but impossible to achieve.

More true with science generally than engineering, but true with engineering as well: Initial effort cannot possibly predict end results.

It is reasonable to take steps that don't adhere to the "cradle to grave" concept as long as they are learning steps, not production steps. Would we have solar panels on people's roofs at all if we couldn't install the first one without totally understanding the recycling cycle? How much would fossil fuel production and use have happened as a result of that?

Just as it was important to take initial steps against Covid-19 without entirely understanding the disease, it is necessary to start investigating alternate technologies early in the now inevitable disaster of climate change.

So yeah, learn from the problems, create standards, make it expensive to use non-recyclable technology, let the market take care of the rest. But the first part of the learning curve has to be up or we're done before we start.

I wana know when theres going to be a mass move to refining dieseo from waste plastic.

So how do you recycle the large amounts of microplastics worn away by the turbine blades of wind turbines? https://docs.wind-watch.org/Leading-Edge-erosion-and-pollution-from-wind-turbine-blades_5_july_English.pdf

Com dublagem podemos desfrutar desses excelentes vídeos

America has chosen to DRILL BABY DRILL 💀💀