Hacker News Reader

slaymaker1907

This is only if you define sustainable == infinite which is ridiculous. Sure solar power/wind power might be present long after humanity is gone, but that doesn't mean we can continue maintaining solar/wind power plants indefinitely, these things take resources to produce. On the other hand, if we define sustainable as being can we do this thing for a 1000 years without modification, modern nuclear power starts to look a lot more sustainable.

View on HN

I see your point, but eventually the solar panels produce the energy to produce more solar panels. Including the mining

IIRC there is a formal guidance for what is classified as renewable. Things like oil, while originating from biological matter, obviously being considered 'not', while tree mass, plant mass, being considered so. Believe the guidance was whether the carbon emitted in its production has been or could be absorbed within a lifetime, via the means with which it was produced.

I have reservations with nuclear but I imagine it would fit within those guidelines easily.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com