• Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    How wonderful would it be if the ultimate effect of the AI was to use the tech industry’s billions to install tons of carbon free power generation?

          • Rakonat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            The turbine blades are made of carbon fiber. There is no process in effect to deal with them. Too big to crush, not worth scraping or recycling. They all go landfilla.

            • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              There currently are processes to deal with them, multiple companies are working on the problem.

              Current solutions include shredding them and reconstituting into some sort of alternative building material, chemically separating the parts of the composite and creating recycled resin, and mechanically separating and sorting apart the different materials which are then recombined for alternative use.

              This is a good place to look at recent american efforts, but there is more recent information available elsewhere: https://www.energy.gov/eere/wind/wind-turbine-materials-recycling-prize

      • Zink@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Of course there are, because mining and construction are powered by the old stuff. That doesn’t seem like a compelling downside to building things that generate clean power, since that’s a downside to building literally anything.

      • medgremlin@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        The emissions are negligible on the grand scheme of things, especially compared to fossil fuels. The manufacturing of solar panels isn’t the cleanest either.

        • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          What’s the grand scheme of things mean to you? If we average it out over 40 years? How does nuclear even fit in when solar and wind are cheaper? Nuclear plants don’t provide on demand energy to fill in the gaps, they provide energy constantly.

          The only reason it works for microsoft is because they plan to use all that energy consistently. But besides that why should we trust a for-profit company to do anything safely in the first place? Do we have a long history of companies being regulated well or self-regulating well?

          • medgremlin@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            The nuclear industry is heavily regulated by the government via the NRC, but they impose even stricter regulations upon themselves. Solar and wind are cheaper, but they are less reliable. A grid comprised of a mix of solar and wind, bolstered by nuclear is the most effective and least environmentally harmful option that we currently have.