• meyotch@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      7 days ago

      Yes that’s the point but why take the extra steps. Use the low carbon energy directly and stop using the high carbon sources.

      • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        Renewable energy has many parts. I have listed the 5 most important here.

        As you can see, renewable biomass and hydropower are also part of renewable energy. That is because they have the advantage of being both power-sources and energy-storages. That means people will continue to use biomass and combust it in the long term.

      • frank@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        7 days ago

        I think the ideal argument is both. Have a grid that’s (at least vast majority) green, and work towards using said green energy to recapture some CO2

      • Contramuffin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 days ago

        I think the intention is that the switch is not going to be immediate, and so there will be a stretch of time where some places use renewable sources of energy and some places still use non-renewables. There’s nothing you can do if your neighbor doesn’t switch, other than to try to capture their carbon output