this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2026
202 points (99.0% liked)

technology

24387 readers
365 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Feed_el_Castro@hexbear.net 21 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

"The problem with solar panels is that, besides being extremely clean, they also provide extremely cheap electricity"

Statements made by the utterly deranged.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 1 points 13 hours ago (4 children)

Solar panels require mining and non-renewable materials to make, and are economically non-recyclable, meaning they end up in landfill.

[–] WafflesTasteGood@hexbear.net 25 points 12 hours ago

economically non-recyclable

Solar panels are almost entirely recyclable. The same is true for batteries used for energy storage. It not being "economical" is a capitalism problem and not a renewable energy problem.

[–] chgxvjh@hexbear.net 16 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

This is bordering on miss information. It's a tiny fraction of resources compared to what we are currently extracting to produce energy and discarded solar panels are pretty safe (unless it's American solar panels that sometimes contain heavy metals like cadmium).

And the neoliberal answer to solar panels being economically non-recycleable is to increase the cost to putting them in landfills until they are economically recyclable. Even if it's just grinding them into dust to use as a filler in concrete or something.

edit, some rough calculations:

20kg of solar panels produce about as much electricity as 5 tons of coal.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 0 points 12 hours ago (4 children)

Nothing I said is bordering on “miss information”. It’s all true.

If we were serious about “net zero” we’d be all in on nuclear. It’s the only way to it.

[–] WafflesTasteGood@hexbear.net 3 points 5 hours ago

Saying the panels would end up in landfills is absolutely misinformation.

Like 95% of a solar panel is glass, aluminum, or silicon. I terms of recycling, those are some of the most recyclable materials.

If your goal is net zero than solar and batteries is it because its theoretically possible to reach a point where all new panels and batteries are produced from materials recycled out of old panels and batteries.

[–] Nacarbac@hexbear.net 11 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Sure, but we're not doing net zero, and never were. It's an Ideal that dominates in the media only to undermine the actual work of adaptation, since it cannot and will not be attempted under capitalism - it'd be easier to ask the devil to lay off on the brimstone. Like fusion, when net zero 2025 passed, they just start talking about net zero by 2030.

Somewhat decentralised and resilient solar energy infrastructure is far more valuable for surviving extreme climate change and global excitements than a nuclear power infrastructure that won't exist without decades of struggle. And the former can be attempted by individuals and small communities even with our malicious and incapable governments - small-scale community nuclear isn't even a dream.

Focusing on nuclear energy is ultimately passive, it'll always be a decades-long project, first to overcome the hostile regulations and corruption blocking it, and then to just get it done - and it can only be done by corporations or governments, who we must trust to actually do it. Solar/renewables are active, alive, they can be done now even imperfectly, by small groups.

The only single solution is every single solution - nuclear, solar, communism, wind, ecological adaptation, yadda yadda.

[–] egg1918@hexbear.net 14 points 10 hours ago

Nuclear plants require mining and non-renewable materials to make, and are economically non-recyclable, meaning they end up in landfill.

[–] red_giant@hexbear.net 10 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

Hey I’m about to blow your mind: coal comes out of the fucking ground, often requiring mining!, and it can’t be recycled

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 2 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

No shit. Coal works at night though.

[–] red_giant@hexbear.net 8 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Why did you make an inane comment about how solar panels aren’t recyclable and need to be mined then?

It’s not a point worth making because the lifetime emissions of solar are insanely lower than coal, negligible in comparison.

Yet you said solar panels aren’t recyclable and require mining so what were you trying to say? What did you mean by that?

[–] egg1918@hexbear.net 13 points 10 hours ago

Australia yet to discover batteries

[–] Feed_el_Castro@hexbear.net 13 points 13 hours ago

Solar panels require mining and non-renewable materials to make

All human activity has an impact, replacing fossil fuels by solar is extremely positive

and are economically non-recyclable

Their lifespan is 30+ years easily. Recycling may very well become economically feasible once we start generating millions of tons of solar panel residue, large scale operation is a huge aspect of profitability