Given how many bad reviews it has had, is it even worth watching? The reviewers are complaining that it's full of 10 year old video clips, and 10 year old data, so it's meaningless today.
Given how many bad reviews it has had, is it even worth watching? The reviewers are complaining that it's full of 10 year old video clips, and 10 year old data, so it's meaningless today.
Or does it mean that the 'Green Myth' has been going for more than 10 years? Don't just call on the reviewers, tell us what is not true. Burning biomass is not renewable or sustainable, fossil fuels are merely old biomass. Follow the money!
True that it has had bad reviews from some, but that is because they don't like the message isn't it?
Or because the data is simply wrong now.
For example, one of the criticisms I have seen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTxktfc5MJ0 is that the film claims that electric cars aren't "green" because they all run on coal-fired electricity. Which might have been true 10 years ago. But despite the best effors of President Trump, coal fired power stations are closing down across America and being replaced by wind farms and solar farms.
If you use 10 year old data, you get the wrong answers.
Reply. Reply. Reply. Regarding green living we will benefit by considering "The Lorax" and The Pintupi Nine. Both provide great examples of sustainability.
Let's see some numbers then. How much wind and solar is actually generated in the US compared to coal and nuclear? Stop believing the propaganda start looking at the facts. As the representative from the local energy company said you don't get solar power at night. Have you actually watched the film or are you just following second hand reports?
No, I haven't watched the film. Life is too short to watch bad documentaries.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, in 2019, total generation was 4118 billion kWh, of which only 966B kWh was from coal.
That's still ahead of renewables (720B kWh total). But it's clear that coal is nowhere near 100% of US electricity generation. The biggest is now natural gas.
And as a quick postscript to my last post, it's now 21:04 BST here, it's dark outside, and I'm still running on solar power. Batteries are wonderful things!
Typically he avoids the difficult points and classes biomass as a renewable when it makes his figures look better:
"Well, in the third quarter of 2019, renewables in the UK generated more electricity than coal, oil and gas plants put together"
But then speaks out against biofuels:
"Some of us have been speaking out against them ever since they became a serious proposition (since 2004 in my case). Almost every environmental leader I know opposes the burning of fresh materials to generate power."
The only possibly interesting bit is unfortunately behind a paywall
"On average, a solar panel generates 26 units of solar energy for every unit of fossil energy required to build and install it. For wind turbines the ratio is 44 to 1."
I would like to see the assumptions they have used, especialy for solar PV.
