• ComradeSalad@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    China has triple the total wind power that the US does. The US added 18 GW of total capacity last year, and China added 72 GW.

    Womp womp. Guess China is acquiescing to the whims of capital by making wind it’s third most plentiful source of energy generation.

    What kind of argument is that? The WEF says some random piece of technology is good so it’s automatically evil? Really?

    • multitotal@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      China has triple the total wind power that the US does. The US added 18 GW of total capacity last year, and China added 72 GW.

      Oh, I see, the more wind turbines a country has the more communist it is.

      What kind of argument is that? The WEF says some random piece of technology is good so it’s automatically evil? Really?

      It’s exactly the same as your argument, I just flipped it to show you how weak it is. I’m glad we agree.

      In China, the largest wind turbine producer, Goldwind, is only 40% state-owned. In all countries wind power is a capitalist enterprise, whereas most nuclear power plants are publicly/state-owned and controlled.

      • cayde6ml@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Flipping an argument only works if the argument is rational, makes sense or helps illustrate a point. You’re screeching about the World Economic Forum.

        • multitotal@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Did you miss the part where the wind enterprises in China are mostly privately owned? In fact, every wind enterprise around the world is privately owned, while nuclear power plants by their very nature have to be publicly owned or at least under state-control. That’s why most, if not all, nuclear power plants operate as a loss; which is also why you don’t see companies advocating for them as much as they are for wind and solar.

          • cayde6ml@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            Does something that’s privately owned automatically make it a bad thing? It’s way better for the environment than any fossil fuel-based method of energy generation, China is a big advocate of it, it fits into their long-term economic plans and vision, the technology/knowledge/blueprints can easily be exported, and the CPC as a leash on anything and everything private. And not only does the CPC nominally have control over even private enterprises through various methods, it’s willing to crack down if and when necessary.

            You are practically fearmongering.

            You’re also ignoring that despite having “only” a 40 percent stake in Goldwind, that is still likely a controlling/majority individual stake.

            • multitotal@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Does something that’s privately owned automatically make it a bad thing?

              I think so.

              But I could have been wrong re: Goldwind and it seems it is majority owned by companies linked to the CPC.

              Let me revise my argument: wind turbines in deserts where there isn’t much life aren’t a big deal and are a good renewable resource (still inferior to nuclear, though); but wind turbines installed on sea are objectively bad and they negatively impact marine life and the marine environment.