sure if you ignore a whole bunch of variables to suit your agenda

>>16960846
ok now show the mines for all the shit in solar panels and all the petroleum refinery space to power the mining equipment and trucks

>>16960870
they are made mostly of glass, and have trace amounts of other materials

>>16960846
honestly, I'd use the fact that plants require a water source rather than mining of energy source
but also, can you imagine if solar PV panels in production currently were 2x as efficient while lasting the same 20+ years or even longer, and batteries were more dense and even cheaper than today? things would be crazy. energy production would need a few hectares even for relatively small cities.

File: Solar-Truth-Materials-Nee(...).png (482 KB, 1920x1080)

482 KB PNG

>>16960880
That is a non sequitur reply. A solar panel needs all of it's materials in order to exist. So again show me all the mines where the metals come from

>>16960909
Those materials are also used in nuclear power plants. They're used for other indusries as well, of which solar panel production only takes a fraction. These materials are also all recyclable unlike uranium.

>>16960870
and the sun

>>16960909
>A solar panel needs all of it's materials in order to exist.
again, they use trace amounts of materials other than glass.

>show me all the mines where the metals come from
now THAT is a non-sequitur reply. why do you need to know ALL the mines? just google what % the biggest copper and silver mines produce and compare with your image. then google what their surface area is and compare.

I'm not even defending the OP, but your logic is as retarded as his.

also, there are many solar panels made from different materials. you can literally DIY solar PV panels with raspberry juice. look it up.

for nuclear, you can only use a few uncommon materials that you HAVE to mine.

>>16960846
this argument is retarded since not only is it misleading and hyperbolic, it ignores basic facts in favor of nuclear like it's uninterruptible supply. the sun doesn't always shine on the surface of the planet, but nuclear fission always occurs under the same conditions no matter what.

nuclear would be very cheap if we'd just abandon all safety protocols. it's that simple. just reload a savefile if something goes wrong.

>>16960846
Land use is irrelevant metric, it's factored in the price which is the only metric a consumer should be concerned about. If you are investing then you may have to research land use in your local area and if you are investing in a mine then the resource accessibility is almost always more important than the land price. Don't start nuclear threads with bait, you can just be pro nuclear in any of the containment threads (hue) normally.

>>16960977
you can be player one

>>16960979
Yes, land use is just about completely irrelevant, but some people mention it as a point against solar. Turns out, nuclear uses more land.

>>16960982
OP made an error in his calculations and doesn't include solar mining land use. It's thinly veiled bait. I won't argue the point further, just know that OP (you) is so blatantly wrong that it's fairly obvious what is going on and responding further just plays in OP's hands.

>>16960987
>solar mining use
What mining? >>16960915

>>16960988
That post makes a basic mistake as well.

>>16960977
Yes but that would be unholy, accumulating knowledge like that

>>16960870
Mining and enriching Uran takes up more land and energy.

>>16960987
OP didn't do shit. He got the image from reddit

>>16960846
You can use other fuels, uranium is just the best for making nuclear weapons as a byproduct.

burning the equivalent of platinum

>>16960857
such as?

>>16960936
This. The sun causes far more cancer than any nuclear power plant. Why does the solar industry want us to die?

>>16960977
>if we'd just abandon all safety protocols
paying bajllions of dollars in state-mandated insurance is not a safety protocol

>>16960915
>>16960936
>>16960937
show me all the mines for everything and then divide their land area by how much is used by Nuclear and how much is used for solar. If you can't come up with a square surface area unit unit per power unit for both you don't have an argument. Shut the fuck up

>>16961778
No, that's not the right comparison. The uranium mine needs to be operational for the nuclear plants to work while the mines for the solar panels don't, because the solar panels already exist. If you shut down the uranium mine, the nuclear plant needs to shut down. If you shut down the copper mine, the solar panels will continue to work. It's a comparison of land used during the operation of both.

>>16961791
you know that uranium is used for more than nuclear power, right?

Uranium vs solar power is irrelevant now because the AI data centers are closing down now. We might as well go back to the stone age, I have no idea how humans survived before CoPilot