I’ve never heard of this tech before. It seems so simple that it should have been around for at least a century. There have been water-powered mills around for millenia!
Wave farms have yet to pan out. They just don’t produce enough power for how much maintenance they require. Salty water full of debris and living stuff is a bitch.
Hopefully, once the earth is so irreparably inhospitable to humans, the cost benefit analysis calculation will pan out for wall street. While rational, it’s more of a condemnation of our current structures’ failings than an accurate reflection of the effectiveness of a technology
I get it, corporations whose sole aim is to generate profit can’t/won’t undertake unprofitable business. This is why legislation needs to require the externalization of costs like climate change and the poisoning of our environment.
If you only have x number of dollars, do you spend half on simple and efficient solar power and half on high maintenance wave power, all on wave, or all on solar?
It’s not as simple as coal vs wave. There’s a reason there’s more off shore wind projects.
If the goal is carbonless power, it makes more sense to go with solar, wind, and nuclear. They all make cheaper power while remaining carbonless. It cannot be stressed enough how much seawater fucks with the basic operation of machinery.
I’ve never heard of this tech before. It seems so simple that it should have been around for at least a century. There have been water-powered mills around for millenia!
Wave farms have yet to pan out. They just don’t produce enough power for how much maintenance they require. Salty water full of debris and living stuff is a bitch.
Hopefully, once the earth is so irreparably inhospitable to humans, the cost benefit analysis calculation will pan out for wall street. While rational, it’s more of a condemnation of our current structures’ failings than an accurate reflection of the effectiveness of a technology
I get it, corporations whose sole aim is to generate profit can’t/won’t undertake unprofitable business. This is why legislation needs to require the externalization of costs like climate change and the poisoning of our environment.
If you only have x number of dollars, do you spend half on simple and efficient solar power and half on high maintenance wave power, all on wave, or all on solar?
It’s not as simple as coal vs wave. There’s a reason there’s more off shore wind projects.
If the goal is carbonless power, it makes more sense to go with solar, wind, and nuclear. They all make cheaper power while remaining carbonless. It cannot be stressed enough how much seawater fucks with the basic operation of machinery.
I admittedly haven’t seen the numbers so to speak, but if it takes more energy to maintain them than they can produce it kinda defeats the purpose.