Do you think alternatives will be able to completely replace fossil fuels?

  • yes
  • no

0 voters

Depends how far forward you’re looking.

Eventually, of course. Solar harnessed energy in 200 years will probably be all it takes to power the globe.

In the time frames talked about by today’s idiocracies? Of fucking course not. Not without major detriment to the world as a whole.


They already are able to if you include renewable bio fuels.

But we need a lot of work to electrical grids worldwide if you mean wind, solar, nuclear, hydroelectric, etc… can happen but would take decades maybe a couple generations.

Such a shit poll

The answer of course is yes but the question is when will it be possible

1 Like

Why does it trigger you so much?

Because it’s kind of obvious, and anyone voting no is ridiculous.

1 Like

eventually sure.

as others have said it depends on when. certainly if you really consider nuclear and all bio fuels and make a commitment to it we could do it now. france runs almost all of it’s power on nuclear energy. they used to make so much of it they exported it to other countries.

but big oil has no vested interest in this ever happening, certainly not over night. and they have more than enough power to slow it down for at least 50 years.

I said no.

Every model which I have ever seen to go 100% renewable/clean energy resolves itself to nothing more than a self licking Ice Cream cone that eventually requires external fossil fuels.

1 Like

There are HUNDREDS of years of so-called fossil fuels still in the ground.

Over time a healthy economy will figure it all out when it is profitable to so.

Government dictating this will end in disaster.

1 Like

The costs of the alternatives are the obstacle rather than big oil.

Explain why it’s obvious…not disagreeing but what’s your evidence…

Governments aren’t trying to replace fossil fuels because they aren’t profitable.

You will never know.

nuclear’s cheap.

1 Like

I thought nuclear was the most expensive?

Eventually, yes. But not any time soon.

depends on how you measure and what generation of nuclear tech you use. 2nd and even 3rd gen is expensive. 4th gen is pretty cheap. not the cheapest, but it’s the most viable. i think hydroelectric is the cheapest, but it couldn’t power what nuclear can.

Someone showed me the estimated world’s energy usage during March-July 2020. That will be the lowest that it will ever go in our lifetime.

Renewable/Clean energy won’t ever even be able to handle March-July 2020 level of economic activity much less when people want to actually go out and do things.

Nukes could handle it.

I voted no based on a timeline of the average OGer life expectancy.