IRMacGuyver

IRMacGuyver t1_j81ey8i wrote

I worked at a stadium. I worked for a contractor and was not directly employed by the team. In fact only a few of the teams even own their own stadium. They just lease them most of the time. Even then the ones that are owned "by the team" are mostly owned by the owner of the team and held as separate business entities from the team itself so even those aren't owned by the team.

1

IRMacGuyver t1_j6lq00x wrote

Except it can't be ever. There just isn't an efficient way to make and store hydrogen that can't be done better by regular batteries. The making of hydrogen will always produce more carbon emissions than battery technologies.

1

IRMacGuyver t1_j60lt9i wrote

I'm not incorrect. It says zero carbon. You're trying to ignore that and misdirect the conversation.

In the future the robots will kill us all before we have a chance to switch over to a truly zero carbon power source. Because even making solar panels and wind turbines produces carbon emissions.

0

IRMacGuyver t1_j5r95nm wrote

I've been saying for a while that we need to build more cisterns. The Greeks, Romans, Indians, etc all knew about how important cisterns were millenia ago. Why can't we build more now? Oh right probably because homeless people make camps in them and drown when it rains.

11

IRMacGuyver t1_j5qhfk1 wrote

And it can't be. Hydrogen is produced by breaking down hydrocarbons. Getting hydrogen from seawater is a fantasy that's not practical in the real world due to the insanely high energy cost. Of course on top of that the energy used to break down sea water is 70% coal powered.

1