Hacker News Reader

> In some cases it's questionable if some green technologies actually are a net positive at all.

This is just FUD, unless you actually have numbers that show CO2 emissions are higher over the lifetime of a solar panel compared to a coal power plant.

> don't want to consider the very obvious alternative, dematerialisation and reduction of energy consumption.

Forcing everybody into poverty is not a viable alternative.

> It highlights the extremely neglected costs in raw material and non-electrifiable infrastructure that is required to produce materials that are nominally 'green'.

Ignored by whom? You?

In fact, embedded energy is a huge consideration in the evaluation of green technologies.

It’s a depressingly common reality that “nobody has considered” is effectively equivalent to “I haven’t considered” on the internet.

The idea that solar panels might not be more efficient than burning coal is not an opinion held by someone who has done any level of research on the subject at all.

> It highlights the extremely neglected costs in raw material and non-electrifiable infrastructure that is required to produce materials that are nominally 'green'.

Hey just because you haven't thought of them doesn't mean other people with much more knowledge and experience on the subject haven't.