1328

submitted 2 weeks ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

107 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 weeks ago

you really think this is going to stop the globalism aspect from happening? If you can ship something, and get better market rates on it, you're going to do it. Economics follows the cheapest route, not the most efficient.

It also just makes sense if you think about it. Places like alaska are going to struggle to generate green energy compared to another place like, texas for example. If you can ship in green hydrogen much cheaper than you can locally produce energy, why wouldn't you? It's a reasonable solution to the problem of supply and demand scaling.

[-] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, but Alaska uses dramatically less energy than... like, everywhere. Given that there are no people and the only industries are either oil or resources.

[-] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 weeks ago

oil and resource industries are pretty well known for being energy intensive no?

last i checked industry is the primary energy consumer. Sure there's less people in alaska, but it was just an example i picked, and the market economics would still be applicable there. If it's cheaper to buy hydrogen, than it is to produce locally sourced power, that's going to be what happens.