The Best Worst Energy Source

Подписаться 2,9 млн

Просмотров 421 тыс.

50% 1

This video was made in partnership with Bill Gates. To learn more about his work on clean energy, visit gatesnot.es/2X0Nxzv
Although coal is such an amazing energy source that we've kept using it despite the harm it causes, today we may be better poised to stop using it than at any previous time in history.
Thanks also to our Patreon patrons / minuteearth and our RU-vid members.
___________________________________________
If you liked this week’s video, you might also like:
See How the World’s Most Polluted Air Compares With Your City’s - www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...
_________________________________________
Subscribe to MinuteEarth on RU-vid: goo.gl/EpIDGd
Support us on Patreon: goo.gl/ZVgLQZ
And visit our website: www.minuteearth.com/
Say hello on Facebook: goo.gl/FpAvo6
And Twitter: goo.gl/Y1aWVC
And download our videos on itunes: goo.gl/sfwS6n
___________________________________________
Credits (and Twitter handles):
Script Writer and Narrator: Alex Reich (@alexhreich)
Video Illustrator and Director: Ever Salazar (@eversalazar)
Video Co-Illustrator: Arcadi Garcia Rius (@garirius)
With Contributions From: Henry Reich, Kate Yoshida, Peter Reich, David Goldenberg, Julián Gómez, Sarah Berman
Music by: Nathaniel Schroeder: / drschroeder
___________________________________________
References:
Caldeira, K. Personal communication, Feb 2020
Coady, D. et al. 2015. How Large Are Global Energy Subsidies? www.imf.org/en/Publications/W...
Farrow, A., Miller, K.A. & Myllyvirta, L. February 2020. Toxic air: The price of fossil fuels. Seoul: Greenpeace Southeast Asia. 44 pp. storage.googleapis.com/planet...
Freese, B. 2016. Coal: A Human History. Basic Books
Freese, B. Personal communication, Feb 2020
IEA. 2019. Coal 2019. Paris. www.iea.org/reports/coal-2019
IEA. 2019. Global Energy & CO2 Status Report 2019. Paris. www.iea.org/reports/global-en...
Jaffe, E. 17 September 2015. The Enormous Social Cost of Cheap Coal. www.citylab.com/environment/2...
Ramani, R.V. & Evans, M.A. "Coal Mining." www.britannica.com/technology... Accessed Dec 2019
Pompeu, N.B. 14 Feb 2019. Air Pollution and the Health Cost of Coal. www.iisd.org/gsi/subsidy-watc...
Union of Concerned Scientists. 15 July 2006. A Short History of Energy. www.ucsusa.org/resources/shor...
US EIA. "Coal explained: Coal and the environment." www.eia.gov/energyexplained/c... Accessed Dec 2019
Wikipedia. “Coal.” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal Accessed Dec 2019
Wikipedia. “History of coal mining.” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History... Accessed Dec 2019
World Coal Association. "Where is coal found?” www.worldcoal.org/coal/where-... Accessed Feb 2020
ourworldindata.org/uploads/20...
www.lazard.com/media/451086/l...
www.irena.org/costs/Power-Gen...

Наука

Опубликовано:

8 июн 2020

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 923

@MinuteEarth 4 года назад

Our supportive viewers are the coal-est, you all rock! Want to become our Patreon or member on RU-vid? Just visit www.patreon.com/MinuteEarth or click "JOIN". Thanks!

@esii003 4 года назад

MinuteEarth hello

@Phoenix_The_HeroHater 4 года назад

@PlebsOnYouTube 4 года назад

@JunSian1001 4 года назад

@MinuteEarth The energy content of coal is ~30,000 kilojoule/kg or ~30 MJ/kg, NOT 30,000 joule/kg. It is off by a factor of 1000.

@somewhatBoring 4 года назад

Rock rockyyyy!!!

@fretzeal3421 4 года назад

I love how the coal is still smiling whilst being set on firr

@feynstein1004 4 года назад

That's because he's lit 😏

@theviniso 4 года назад

I want a pet coal

@alexricky87 4 года назад

This coal is on FYAH!🔥🔥🔥

@luciaperez8021 4 года назад

@@alexricky87 OMG u r a genious

@saponso4806 4 года назад

Fire

@this_is_patrick 4 года назад

Minute Earth has been talking a lot about poop lately I genuinely thought it was poop on the thumbnail.

@philipmeisterl 4 года назад

same😂

@shim2dawg 4 года назад

coal is basically poop

@paysmenot2624 4 года назад

looked like potato

@turtleiguess5240 4 года назад

This is Patrick me too

@adriandinu5499 4 года назад

@@shim2dawg its earths poop

@zsheets7483 4 года назад

Thank you for keeping nuclear on your list of good alternatives. Way too often people try to lump it in with our sootier options.

@fence03 5 месяцев назад

If you don’t mess it up, it’s pretty safe

@jeffbenton6183 2 месяца назад

@@fence03Even with the few mess-ups in history, it has a better track record than everything else - according to those who actually bother to do the math

@factorfitness3713 Месяц назад

Honest question - but what about the waste? Is it sustainable?

@zsheets7483 Месяц назад

@@factorfitness3713 Spent uranium can be recycled for use in reactors designed for such fuel. Useful isotopes such as cobalt-60, which has medical and industrial applications, can be produced in nuclear reactors as well. It's at least sustainable enough to get us to commercially viable fusion power. Then all of this becomes largely moot, because hydrogen is the single most abundant element in the universe.

@jeffbenton6183 Месяц назад

@factorfitness3713 Nuclear power produces less radioactive waste than rare earth mining (which wind and solar could well depend on). If you were to take *all* the spent fuel from all commercial reactors *ever* used in the US, it would all fit on just one gridiron football field if stacked 40 feet (~12 metres) high. Just the 3 blades of a *single* wind turbine (which wear out after only 25 years) fill up roughly the same volume. Granted, these blades aren't toxic (unless you incinerate them - which we sometimes do), but they have to go *somewhere* and we'll eventually run out of space to bury 'em all (unless we burn it). As zsheets noted, it could be reprocessed into MOX, or fed into a breeder reactor, effectively recycling it. It's estimated that if a sufficient number of breeders were built, then that "spent" fuel could provide *all* of the United States' electricity for the next 150 years (at current consumption rates). Lastly, it's worth mentioning that the industry treats spent fuel (even after its cooled off and had its harmfulness reduced by decades of radioactive decay) as if it's the most dangerous yet worthless thing on the planet (it's neither). Meanwhile, huge quantities of solar panels are left to rot in landfills where the trace amounts of lead contained therein will eventually leach into the environment (lead, of course, has no half-life - it's toxic forever and will never become any less toxic, unlike radiotoxins, which decrease radioactivity at an *exponential* rate). We can afford to have so much security for nuclear waste because there's so little of it - nuclear power is just absurdly efficient. So yeah, nuclear waste is the most sustainable toxic waste there is.

@_zarp_3963 4 года назад

Coal pollutes the air and water Me: playing satisfactory with 14 coal generators

@Aelfraed26 4 года назад

Same here but Factorio instead of Satisfactory.

@ganaraminukshuk0 4 года назад

Welp, time to watch Let's Game it Out desecrate an entire virtual landscape for his own personal amusement.

@666Tomato666 4 года назад

@@Aelfraed26 the factory must grow

@SuperExodian 4 года назад

hey at least it's not me playing stellaris... every single planet must be turned into a tomb world! there can only be ONE surviving race! i uhhh, may have a bit too much fun playing actual space hitler in that game.

@Krashnachen 4 года назад

Hey satisfactory doesn't happen on earth. Who knows, maybe you are saving the ecosystem by adding Co2 to the atmosphere! Pollute away!

@Thrilller525 4 года назад

Making the coal look so animated and adorable really had me conflicted and I’m an environmental major ...

@Aaron.Reichert 4 года назад

really? why?

@iamrsableye3498 4 года назад

Don't let them burn the sweet baby rock then!

@theviniso 4 года назад

@@iamrsableye3498 But look how happy it is when burning!

@nothing-mm8ui 3 года назад

@@theviniso he's finding his true purpose

@Eric-qe6xz 3 года назад

Literally same

@eragon78 4 года назад

Im glad that there are finally a few videos that talk about alternatives to things like fossil fuels WITHOUT demonizing Nuclear power. I never understood how so many groups can be against fossil fuels and then push so hard against one of the best alternatives because they dont properly understand it. Its refreshing to see education channels open to the idea of nuclear as just one of many tools to help fight against fossil fuels.

@firstname405 4 года назад

Yeah it was nice to see them not succumb to the same old fear-mongering 😄

@3ghin5 4 года назад

@@firstname405 definitely 👍

@miguelgutierrez8694 4 года назад

Yeah Real Engineering did a video on it in case you haven't seen it. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-UC_BCz0pzMw.html The issue is that it is only successful in the long term, so neither a politician or an investment business would consider it worth their time.

@useodyseeorbitchute9450 3 года назад

"I never understood" There is an explanation circulating in more right wing circles, that's not about actual ecology but about feeling morally superior (for an average supporter) or getting political power (for the top). Too cynical and exaggerated? Maybe for approach towards nuclear power indeed, but matches in cases like Green New Deal, which is mostly even barely about ecology.

@EthanParmetItsDaBunny 2 года назад

@@useodyseeorbitchute9450 Yes. People are basically brainwashed by both politicians and oil barons to believing that we'll all die of another Fukushima if we switch over to nuclear.

@MoodEbony 4 года назад

I'm glad that they mentioned nuclear energy. Unfortunately, it seems to be forbidden to discuss these days. Hydro has some real potential in select areas. Wind and Solar simply are not reliable enough and require too much land to be realistically viable. En masse, they also can wreak havoc on their local ecosystems. The same goes for bio fuels. Nuclear is the only viable solution that we currently have if we're really serious about ending carbon emissions. Including liquid thorium reactors and waste scrubbing, there's still a lot of real potential to be unlocked.

@ChitranjanBaghiofficial 4 года назад

that nuclear high cost is because of stupid regulations and not allowing new gen iv reactors.

@skeetsmcgrew3282 4 года назад

I hate when underfunded technology gets pigeonholed as expensive. Hell look at LED's, them shits was mad expensive 20 years ago. Now they practically give them away.

@eltimbalino 3 года назад

Does the price include the total cost of stopping people or the environment from getting harmed by the radioactive waste until the waste is no longer dangerous to anything?

@ubermidget2 3 года назад

@@eltimbalino Interestingly enough, The full cost of disposal of Nuclear Waste is covered by the cost of the Power

@infinitefire77yes81 3 года назад

Stupid regulations are to avoid nuclear accident

@ChitranjanBaghiofficial 3 года назад

@@infinitefire77yes81 yeah I wish we had regulated the initial steam engine and internal cumbustion engine with the same strictness as we do nuclear. Which makes me wonder would those engines have advanced in their design and working under such strict regulation.

@GamerTagCaptCluel3ss 4 года назад

Could you do a video on burying pollution? I’ve never heard of that before, and would love to hear some more about it.

@jasonwalker9471 4 года назад

They're talking about carbon sequestration. You can do things like pump the C02 into an old abandoned mine or something, then seal it off. You can also attempt to convert the C02 back into rock form, but this is energy intensive, and if you're going to do this then you shouldn't have burnt the coal in the first place. You'll spend more energy converting the C02 to rock than you will get out of the coal.

@mlc4495 4 года назад

It's a scam pushed by the coal and wider fossil fuel industry. The energy requirements to sequester CO2 are enormous and economically unviable.

@skeetsmcgrew3282 4 года назад

@@mlc4495 That's what I was figuring. I also thought, yeah ok well of it's that easy why haven't we done it?

@ViciousVinnyD 3 года назад

You can filter coal fumes to remove harmful chemicals and soot, but co2 itself is very energy intensive to collect. As far as climate change is concerned, coal just isn't viable.

@ripjou2304 4 года назад

When you ask yourself during the whole video : "what's the pun gonna be?"

@Combes_ Год назад

It's 'coal turkey'

@rextanglr4056 4 года назад

That is, unless you're in a video game where pretty much everything is cubical.

@mrayrick7631 4 года назад

Maximal's Personal Profile wait blaze rods are fuel in Minecraft?

@rextanglr4056 4 года назад

@Maximal's Personal Profile Yeah, but then, we'll have to go to the underworld.

@l1ttel_y699 4 года назад

If you're technology is developed enough, you'll find blaze rods and dried kelp much better than coal, as you're normally collecting them in a renewable way.

@marcy1949 4 года назад

AwesomeGuy69: Pure Awesomeness honestly the nether is easy, the new update changes it tho so it's harder/easier

@pirate2489 4 года назад

Burn blocks of coal

@MisterMicrowaves 4 года назад

Video: *Today* Minute Earth’s Comment: *6 Days Ago*

@dr.sajidmadethisaccount579 4 года назад

How!!!

@datblue1104 4 года назад

@@dr.sajidmadethisaccount579 unlisted

@dorcas_ 4 года назад

Yes.

@gudik1525 4 года назад

@@datblue1104 either that or patreon

@takenname8053 4 года назад

time travel

@SpaceNavy90 4 года назад

I'm very happy that MinuteEarth included nuclear as an acceptable "green" replacement for coal. It gets a bad rap despite how safe it actually is. More research funding should be put into nuclear fusion so we can reap the benefits of unlimited energy with next to no downsides.

@David_Last_Name 4 года назад

As long as we don't toss the nuclear waste into the ocean and then shoot the barrels when they don't sink (yes, we used to do this), yes I agree.

@scptime1188 4 года назад

Yeah. Solar, Wind, Geo and Nuclear are my favourite energy sources. Every energy source has it's ups and downs, but these have the least cons, and some good benefits too.

@Thiago100Zwetsch 4 года назад

1:16 Oh, I see, when Elizabeth II was just a teenager.

@sauvanto9316 4 года назад

Nuclear yes finally! it is THE clean solution, but I think the issue people have with nuclear is due to a branding issue... "Nuclear" unfortunately makes people think of "nukes", perhaps re-branding it as "atomic energy" or "fission power" would distance it from the past

@andrasfogarasi5014 4 года назад

@Daniel von Strangle Fission bomb

@eltimbalino 3 года назад

Or maybe "Radioactive Waste Maker"

@456MrPeople 3 года назад

The new types of nuclear reactors like thorium salt reactors don’t produce waste that take thousands of years to break down.

@KenhelExcallius 3 года назад

@@eltimbalino what the hells wrong with you dude, your not comparing it to coal, coal kills MORE people than nuclear does per energy generated, it may cost more but the plants we are currently using are freaking 70 years old cold war technology, or even older

@nerobernardino88 3 года назад

@@andrasfogarasi5014 So, how about Big Sciency Reactor?

@jackychen7769 4 года назад

“It’s high time we try to go coal turkey.” Me: nice pun, but WHY IS THE COAL NOT IN THE SHAPE OF A TURKEY!?!?

@alexanderx33 4 года назад

Props for including nuclear! Btw, the third number, $/MWh is "with current regulations" Not "with appropriate regulations". The NRC is the biggest polluter in the country due to how it overregulates and thus artificially raises the cost of nuclear power.

@sungoddessamaterasu5439 4 года назад

*Coal*d Turkey Clever...

@Xaelum 4 года назад

Just a puntualization from the sources you provided. From ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy it states that the 0.02 deaths/TW from nuclear is likely to be lower than that, since the method used for calculating indirect number of deaths "likely overstates the number of potential cancer cases and deaths which result from low-level radiation exposure".

@whosthere109 4 года назад

How about the price?, I think the nuclear is way cheaper than the other sources

@yehonatanduek8705 4 года назад

2:17 why is nuclear power price is in green while being *higher* then coal price which is red? I like and agree with the general message you gave but I feel like that design choice makes it look way more black and white then it is, bordering on misleading.

@vaclavzajac214 4 года назад

The price for renewables is in reality much higher too. I don't want to offend anyone, but it is easier to say something that isn't entirely to a less educated person that to try to explain it with the complex scientific method. This is why you learn a Rutherford type atom instead of the quantum model, it's just much easier and am average won't use it anyway You can say the same about wearing face masks for example.

@theawecat27 4 года назад

@@vaclavzajac214 Not all renewables are that expensive really, solar power is getting really cheap.

@joelvenga 4 года назад

Nuclear is cheaper, safer, and can actually be cheaper than coal beyond the cost of the plant. It is literally better but stopped being used because of the cold war, Fukushima and Chernobyl, and environmentalists who can't understand that Nuclear is a better alternative to coal.

@emilien4470 4 года назад

@@theawecat27 And not produce when we needed...

@tqit0210 4 года назад

I'm just confused trying to comprehend what the colors mean on that line ($/MWh). The way I see it, it seems that they colored just by column, instead of row.

@Lorinissa- 4 года назад

Whenever I decide to read, RU-vid decides to post a new video for me. Every five minutes.

@dorcas_ 4 года назад

Same :(

@LeRoastedChickenOnAStickMan 4 года назад

I read any ways.

@marc_frank 4 года назад

turn off all notifications

@dutchgala826 4 года назад

You're still is reading. Educating yourself. *Stay Safe Everyone!* 😷

@ArtArtisian 4 года назад

Remember: the videos will still be here later! Often with great comments left by the early birds.

@SupremeLeaderKimJong-un 4 года назад

MinuteEarth: Best energy source USA: *Oil*

@bananya6020 4 года назад

Kim Jong-un: *nuclear*

@OverpricedGrapes 4 года назад

bananya lol

@hblaub 4 года назад

Greetings, dear leader! Happy to see you alive and well!

@kilougi 4 года назад

The US only uses 0.5% oil for Electricity Generation. 38% from Gas, and followed by coal with 23%. Followed by Nuclear 17%

@od9694 4 года назад

The rest of the world: It's a good idea for everyone to have electricity North Korea: no it's not important

@FelipeKana1 4 года назад

*ahem* "For ONLY over a hundred years"

@micaelgarcia1576 4 года назад

Yeah like that's only 3~5 generations, idk why they worded it like that

@Aaron.Reichert 4 года назад

150 years that we know of. There is probably much more. And as technology improves and types like solar and wind become better supplements coal resources will probably end up lasting longer than needed. Much like peak oil became a joke and now they are not worried about running out of supply but instead worried about running out of demand.

@jskvbinmv 4 года назад

Assuming energy consumption stays at the current level, which it does not.

@juliasteam2077 4 года назад

@@jskvbinmv you really think you can predict anything about the energy consumption of the future? Things are developing at all times, meaning both that we invent new things but also get rid of others, make them more effecient. It could very well be that the energy consumption goes down just because people might upgrade to more effiecient devices. Sure, the consumption was rising until now, but that's to be expected, and it'll keep on rising for a while. But probably not for 150 years.

@iwiffitthitotonacc4673 4 года назад

@@Aaron.Reichert There's also the possibility of oil extraction becoming more expensive than consumers can afford, since easy sources of oil are becoming rather scarce.

@fretzeal3421 4 года назад

I love how the coal is still smiling whilst being set on fire

@Ovni121 4 года назад

There's also the upfront cost of coal that is cheaper. A coal power plant is cheap to build compared to hydro, solar or wind power plant. That's why rapidly developing nations will still chose coal to answer to the demand.

@GregHassler 4 года назад

This is completely incorrect, wind is easily the least expensive way to create new power today. Coal has become one of the most expensive ways, hence it's significant decline in the past decade.

@Ovni121 4 года назад

@@GregHassler as with all things, it depends. You're right that a wind project is cheaper per MWh with newer tech if you have a good spot for windmills. Sadly cheap coal plants without good pollution control is cheaper and easier to build for developing countries. I'm 100% for clean energy because with fossil fuels, you always pay the price in the future with the cleanups, health issues and global warming.

@seneca983 4 года назад

@@GregHassler Wind is cheap to operate, not cheap to build.

@GregHassler 4 года назад

@@seneca983 sorry that's incorrect, it's cheap to build and operate. On a per kWh basis. Nuclear is the one that's super expensive to build up front and then pays back generously after 12-15 years, but nobody is willing to wait that long anymore. Coal is expensive and has a long lead time to build. Wind is quick and quite cheap. Nat Gas might be the closest thing to it.

@soufianekharroubi8835 4 года назад

Would it be possible to have the sources of the numbers you give at 2:18? I've always seen that nuclear kills less than solar, wind and hydro. Also, the g CO2/kWh look extremely low for solar, wind and nuclear (respectively 5, 4 and 3 g CO2/kWh) compared to the numbers presented by the IPCC (respectively 48, 11 and 12 g CO2/kWh). About prices, I'm also curious as if storage is included in prices of solar and wind (as we need to compare things which are comparable) or if it's just the market price. Thank you :)

@devluz 4 года назад

I remember loosing a whole day trying to look into these numbers a while ago. The vast majority you find online about it is total rubbish and outright propaganda e.g. taking CO2 emission and deaths into account for construction of one kind of power source and ignoring it for the other. Some were comparing numbers from US only for one power source with some random selection of others in third world countries and so on.

@terjethornqvist4361 4 года назад

I feel that the numbers need a lot more clarifications, given the approximate electricity production in the world (~25PWh) and about 10% of that being nuclear (grabbed from wikipedia so take it for what it's worth )that would yield 2.5PWh of nuclear generated energy = 2500*0.07 = 175 average deaths due to nuclear power per year. Given the widely varying and hard to measure number of actual deaths caused by the Chernobyl disaster I find this number to be plausible with the vast majority of these being in the immediately affected area. My gut feeling is that the number given for deaths due to hydro may be a bit on the low side, given the magnitude of the Banqiao dam failure that would alone give about the same number of yearly deaths if averaged over 100 years, but given the larger proportion of hydro power to nuclear the deaths/TWh would still be lower, but definitely above the 0.002. I would also like some clarification of how you reach the CO2 emissions of hydro given that the vast majority of those would be during the construction phase earthworks, concrete, flooding forested areas etc, the running should be almost zero, compare this to nuclear that still require lots of construction and concrete, though probably not as much, but then have an ongoing cost for mining and refining. as a whole it seems a bit off.

@BojanPotocnik 4 года назад

How did you calculate those numbers for nuclear power? It would be nice to also explain the whole chain for all sources - e.g. solar cells are only clean energy after you buy them and until you need to replace them (producing a lot of toxic waste during productions and when thrown away).

@tiffyw92 4 года назад

We've always asked what coal does when it's lit on fire, but never asked _how it feels_ to be lit on fire. Does it feel like it's burning bright or like it's just a flaming heap?

@LuisFelipe-jb1bq 4 года назад

Coal: I am your friend Humans: yay Coal like so many years later: I lied

@JustADioWhosAHeroForFun 4 года назад

If stress was electricity, I can power the entire globe

@skibididopyesdop 4 года назад

Underrated

@PannenTheKoek 4 года назад

Lower crop harvest? I tought plants love CO2

@falnica 4 года назад

Soon we'll realize the best energy source was inside us the whole time: human souls * cue me smiling holding a philosopher stone *

@brentoctaviano7059 4 года назад

What

@alexanderlobanov3880 4 года назад

*Clap the hands with epic music*

@gavinbrown216 4 года назад

“Find the truth within the truth”

@Barwasser 4 года назад

Ed...ward...ni...san

@xenontesla122 4 года назад

I'm so glad I get this reference now. (Fullmetal Alchemist)

@Tobbe628 4 года назад

Its time for Nuclear POWER!

@Jar.Headed 4 года назад

The coal's face is like "Thats a TERRIBLE joke" on 2:27

@aspenpawarts9333 4 года назад

Thanks for the great, informative vid minute earth! Great as always!

@MrNyagasu 4 года назад

Based on title and image i tought poop was the energy source :P Anyway, nucleat energy is a lot cleaner.

@Ollidol 4 года назад

Not poop but Methane gas is a pretty good energy source. And we get it "naturally" from waste and also poop. Maybe not the best source but a working one.

@jlammetje 4 года назад

Me too! I thought it was a pile of manure, but apparently coal looks a lot like it 💩

@seneca983 4 года назад

They also have a video on poop as an energy source: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-JYda2v94dgc.html

@FrederickStark 4 года назад

Clean yes, but you might have noticed on their comparison chart that it's also far more expensive than all the other options

@The360MlgNoscoper 4 года назад

Nuclear Gang

@birbsareverycute8074 4 года назад

Yay, AlmostThreeMinutesEarth just posted a video!

@tbro31218 4 года назад

"way cheaper" Nuclear: $155 Coal: $109 *confused confusion intensifies*

@MinuteEarth 4 года назад

the “on average” is an important part of that sentence.

@tbro31218 4 года назад

@@MinuteEarth oooooh. sorry, must've missed that 😅

@user-uh9pk7rb4d 4 года назад

2:09 - EROI? No, not heard

@TalysAlankil 4 года назад

thanks for mentioning nuclear among the alternatives, it's infuriating to see the irrational way people tend to talk about it

@AverytheCubanAmerican 4 года назад

West Virginia is known for their coal industry. Mountain Mama loves coal

@JustinRed624 4 года назад

They used and mined coal even before those Country Roads were built

@Michael-qi9tw 4 года назад

Also It’s the 2nd most unhappy state in the US due to the obsolete and perniciousness nature of the coal industry. Big energy companies don’t care about unskilled miners leading to them being subjected to abysmal conditions for minimal pay. And many are left destitute when coal mines go dry

@disguisedpuppy 4 года назад

Just youtube notified me this recommendation

@d7boih118 4 года назад

I'm really happy that you guys are teaching us these things. Thanks

@2Evil2Hope 4 года назад

At least they were honest in this video when talking about the need for nuclear to maintain a base load. The only reason we can utilize all the new renewable energy resources is because nuclear and coal can be utilized at any time to make up for the lack when there is little sun, little wind, or hydro isn't an option. The book "Lights Out" goes into detail about this and how the need to eliminate the moratorium on new nuclear power plants.

@hedgehog3180 4 года назад

That is not what base load is and in fact solar and wind are pretty much perfect for base load. Base load refers to what the demand is at it's lowest, ie the base you need to cover without considering peaks. It's the peaks that are the issue however it is also wrong to say that nuclear and coal are great for those either, especially nuclear. A nuclear power plant is also best at covering base loads and it is slow to increase production and is at it's most efficient when producing a constant amount of power. You can do it but it'll be less efficient and really nuclear is at it's best when it's at peak efficiency. Coal is similar, it takes a long time to start up a coal power plant so it's not quick to respond to sudden demands but the demand curves usually are gentle enough that coal can keep up. But still usually it's most efficient when running at a constant load where the furnace is basically lit from when the plant is inaugurated till it's shut down. However any sort of turbine power is in generally better at dealing with demand curves because of the resistance naturally induced when there's more supply than demand. Obviously though you can't rely too much on that or you'd risk fire. But this is why Britain while using coal and nuclear still had to build a pumped storage battery, coal and nuclear simply couldn't respond to the sharp peaks in British demand.

@RingsOfAsh 4 года назад

When you don't want to do school work so you watch minute earth for your subjects. 😐

@briangarrow448 4 года назад

My lifetime has been spent working in energy and water infrastructure facilities. I started in 1979, at a new nuclear power station, working on the containment vessel, the reactor and the refueling building. I ended my career working at a coal fired power plant cleaning up the toxic waste around the mine that provided fuel for it. In the decades between, I worked on multiple facilities, everything from drilling modules at the North Slope in Alaska to water treatment at a holiday water park. The next generation of craftspersons will be installing wind turbines, solar arrays and other types of clean power solutions. I only wish I had another 40 years to work on those projects.

@micaelgarcia1576 4 года назад

Here's a (to be) wind turbine engineer thanking you for being a part of the giant I'm climbing to reach my goals!

@nikimilky 4 года назад

thanks! I like those kinds of minuteEarth videos

@Peanutjoepap24 4 года назад

Obviously instead of burning coal we should be syphoning energy from Hell on Mars. Dr. Samuel Hayden has assured the world that nothing can possibly go wro- aaAAAHHhaAJkkahjahkAAAAAA...

@mg42000 4 года назад

"on the whole, way cheaper" - shows nuclear energy as nearly 1.5 times as expensive , yet still in green...

@bxyhxyh 4 года назад

On the green part, They say it's not really toxic as those extreme anti-nuclear people claim. And I believe that. BUT mining Uranium is very very toxic to local people and animals who live there. They use very toxic chemicals to mine Uranium and that causes SERIOUS problem to the environment. And locals think that it's caused by radioactive and goes against it, while miners check sample from them in labs and BAM no radioactive. (of course there would be no radioactive) But they hide the fact that problems are caused by CHEMICALS not radioactives. Also nuclear waste is still the main problem. You know you can store coal ash outside on your lawn with no harm except it would make your lawn look dirty and it's dangerious if you inhale a lot of it directly. You can't say same to nuclear waste.

@52flyingbicycles 4 года назад

bxyhxyh oh definitely do not store coal ash on your lawn that is a 2/10 very very bad idea. One rainstorm and all that goes into the water supply.

@JaneDoe-dg1gv 4 года назад

bxyhxyh you're talking about acid run off from heap leaching. That is a problem from the mining industry not the nuclear industry.

@skeetsmcgrew3282 4 года назад

@@52flyingbicycles Wait where do the points for the "2/10" come from? Being easy? 😂

@skeetsmcgrew3282 4 года назад

@@bxyhxyh I disagree about the nuclear waste. First of all, if we actually invested in proper technology for nuclear (like France did) we would create much less waste, like much much less. Some designs are zero waste. And especially in America, we have sooooo much worthless open space. Step one, make a giant, thick-walled lead box, step two fill it with waste, step three toss it in the Mojave. People imagine billions of pounds of the stuff but all the waste in the world makes up a very tiny amount of water/material compared to other forms of heat generation. Can't argue about mining it though. That shit sucks

@atticah290 4 года назад

Any study on the cost and pollution on solar panel creation? What about the the cost of processing them once they become garbage? I am interested to know if it is still overall an cost effective power source. Same applies when comparing traditional engine vs electrical cars, e-cars don’t generate pollution themselves, but batteries do, also they may get charged with electricity generated by coal...

@NoorquackerInd 4 года назад

30 kJ/kg? Uranium: _laughs in 82 TJ/kg_

@TheFuturistTom 4 года назад

I’ve been watching Minute Earth for a while. I liked their content! So I made my own sci-fi/futurist channel!!

@whatsquality5350 4 года назад

I edited this so people don’t know how this got so many likes

@lutgardamoreno3952 4 года назад

I though you Said Cool

@chillyonyotitties 4 года назад

Cool *Set it on fire.*

@loljay3281 4 года назад

*hmm, been naughty recently am I right?*

@vijeshkumar692 4 года назад

Yeah I find it on the surface too

@atulchauhan4825 4 года назад

@@loljay3281 can't get the reference

@benstejskal2395 4 года назад

I had to do a paper on this for school, and it appears we came to the same conclusion of 'It'll go away, just not anytime soon since we still need time for the new energy sources to grow.'

@SangoProductions213 4 года назад

The comparison to quitting cold turkey is actually quite apt. We've got a massive population, and prosperity that goes beyond compare, nix the last couple of months for the poor fools who were locked down and forced to congregate into only a few shops, spreading the disease with vigor. Quitting fossil fuels means: No delivery trucks for the vast majority of people. This means no food deliveries, unless you're paying top dollar. It means you have to live near enough to a farm that hauling the food with your dinky little bike isn't going to take more than half your day. It means starvation for the majority, despite having abundant food. It means having food devoured by insects. Frankly, the transition is going smoothly as new sources of power are being brought online and slowly begins to out compete the primary sources of power. Electric cars are slowly making their way into the hands of even relatively normal people. And mass land transport, via automated electric haulers is becoming a thing. Things are progressing and getting better, but rushing ahead isn't a smart idea. But hey? You want to help push it along? Go out and buy the alternatives yourself. Show your monetary support. "Money talks. Bullshit walks." Which is an odd phrase. As the bullshit seems to talk an awful lot.It's those that have made themselves valuable to others, and then pledged that value to others who actually get things done.

@orderofazarath7609 4 года назад

"Way Cheaper" - Shows a higher than coal price for nucular.

@royrequireswifi488 3 года назад

Order of Azarath Yeah but that’s for our pretty old style nuclear reactors and current tech though hopefully it and fusion energy will become cheaper

@half-landing 3 года назад

Notice how they say on the whole

@royrequireswifi488 3 года назад

HalfLanding Oh yes. Nuclear reactors are a lot more expensive for what they put out on a short term scale. Which is why investors usually don’t invest in nuclear technology and reactors since you only get money off of it if you use it for a long time

@lyngs 4 года назад

You can store uranium in a box...

@spacemanspiff2137 4 года назад

Not after it’s been enriched, unless you don’t mind your box reaching the temperature of the sun

@vaclavzajac214 4 года назад

@@spacemanspiff2137 box of low enriched Uranium needs around 1 200 kilograms to start fission, good luck with finding box that's that big

@LENZ5369 4 года назад

@@spacemanspiff2137 That's not even partially true...it doesn't even make sense.

@newtscamander7713 4 года назад

@@vaclavzajac214 Oh yea! Now I have a purpose to not get rid of that box in my garage my 2646 lbs of americium (element with the closest density to uranium) came in!!!

@benjaminsantillo-herbert2680 4 года назад

If you're reading this comment when nuclear fusion is finally used for creating energy, uranium reactors were probably just a thing in the past, only if youtube had passed the invasion of coppa and other things that are going to happen in the future.

@hyperdude2326 3 года назад

I like how they explain all it in big words then use there drawing skills to make it more understandable

@yasshi4796 4 года назад

Coal is the best way source of energy! Coal: Yes, but actually *no*

@madil2259 4 года назад

The coal looked really cute in this video. ☺️

@Aaron.Reichert 4 года назад

Nuclear is the fuel of the future. Hydro and geothermal are great where they can be done,. Wind and solar are nice supplementary sources. I am excited to see where technology goes next!

@vincentrobinette1507 4 года назад

Right now, the up and coming technology needed most, is efficient, cost effective grid scale electrical energy storage, that can be installed anywhere. energy storage can be used for load leveling for base load generation(nuclear, geothermal) and storage and dispatching energy from intermittent renewable sources.(wind, solar, hydro, wave, tidal)

@jamespedersen4428 4 года назад

117 views and 105 likes. Great job on the video.

@ShawnRavenfire 4 года назад

I live in Pennsylvania, and coal is pretty much just everywhere around here. You can just walk up to the area surrounding a breaker or mine entrance and find loose coal just lying on the ground.

@Enden31 4 года назад

Renewable energies such as solar or wind are not sufficient to tackle CO2 emissions. We have to reduce our overall use of energy as a whole

@skeetsmcgrew3282 4 года назад

That's like saying, tackle crime by asking people to do less crimes. Not disagreeing about wind and solar, but our population keeps growing more and more, requiring more power. We need a heavy solution IMO

@Enden31 4 года назад

Using less energy isn't just about personal will, you're right. But public investments in thermal isolations for buildings, free and wide range busses and trains, heavy taxation on planes, carbon taxes, incentives for low energy farms, etc are as many measures that will decrease the use of energy without relying on good will of the individuals

@skeetsmcgrew3282 4 года назад

@@Enden31 Yeah. That's a tough sell here in America though. I'm not sure what it would take to make that kind of thing happen. Maybe once New Orleans is under a foot of water, idk

@toyuyn 4 года назад

MinuteEarth: alternative energy sources are way cheaper Also MinuteEarth: nuclear energy costs $155/MWh, compared to coal's $109/MWh

@astrumrocket6556 4 года назад

2:17 they even put it in green text as if they were trying to fool people. Really unnecessary, price isn't supposed to be the only thing that matters, things aren't black & white, more expensive options can still be better.

@Trevith99 4 года назад

If you average the prices of the alternatives listed, you get $71.75/MWh, which is still significantly cheaper than using coal.

@MinuteEarth 4 года назад

"On the whole, way cheaper" is an important distinction.

@dotcorbeil6266 Год назад

I like how you used two unstable sources of renewable energy with two sustainable sources.

@robertog8008 4 года назад

2:17 “way cheaper” *laughs in nuclear

@dorcas_ 4 года назад

I came here at the speed of an Android XD

@dorcas_ 4 года назад

I’m such a liar, I don’t have an Android :P

@therubberducky5942 4 года назад

Okay lol

@MrChinner118 4 года назад

Really slow and buggy?

@dorcas_ 4 года назад

E Rod iPhone :𝙿

@dorcas_ 4 года назад

chicken nougats Yes. Very.

@takenname8053 4 года назад

time to get buired in the comments

@gussneighbour8140 4 года назад

You'll NEVER TAKE MY BARBIES! *furiously starts roasting chicken*

@997_99 4 года назад

You explained good point good work

@anuragkevat6849 4 года назад

We gonna ignore the fact that he made this video in partnership with Bill Gates

@gussneighbour8140 4 года назад

Ye they be doing this for a while now

@michi9955 4 года назад

.. and?

@moomheartzs 4 года назад

2:18 Nuclear is not cheap.

@solareclair357 4 года назад

0:18 Minecraft: I second that

@user-bx1kt7dk8t 4 года назад

Nice Video. Do you have any uploadplan? Like every monday.

@les07derEroberer 4 года назад

That coal is awfully happy about Incineration

@vincentrobinette1507 4 года назад

It kind of reminds me of the old Starkist Tuna commercials, where they feel honored to be the most edible tuna!

@dutchgala826 4 года назад

Hi Alex! *Love to All. Stay safe,*

@user-qh9ft7lh8o 4 года назад

Love your videos

@Oblic008 4 года назад

I know there are some alternatives for coal in the steel industry, but most of those are derived from coal. It is just a great source of C for the process. Any thoughts on a new source in this case?

@12D_D21 4 года назад

I think there’s an error at 2:18. Is coal more expensive than nuclear because its numbers are red? Don’t get me wrong, I prefer nuclear, but please, show your data in a less misleading way. Great vid, btw!

@radagastwiz 4 года назад

Coal does have another use beyond energy: as a carbon source for steel. But that can be managed and approached more sustainably, certainly.

@vincentrobinette1507 4 года назад

At least, theoretically, the carbon goes into the steel, rather into the air. With today's manufacturing, the anthracite coking coal is also used as the heat source for the steel, in which, it is used as fuel, exhausting carbon dioxide into the air. With technology and renewable energy, it can be used more like an "ingredient" and much less like a fuel. That would mean using less than 1/10 the amount of coal per ton of steel.

@maverick9708 4 года назад

not a terrible job, but from all the courses i had to take on energy systems i had to point out huge omissions that were made for what I'm hoping to be the sake of brevity. first off, that deaths/TWh stat tho... big oof on you for not doing a better job on that because the realistic figures put the relative risk of your figures to shame (particularly nuclear because there are two very different ways of calculating it). also there are huge problems with the environmental impact of those renewable sources like threatening entire ecosystems with hydro or toxic and hazardous materials for solar. this also doesn't mention the technical and environmental challenges that come with maintaining an electrical grid that uses renewables because their energy output varies heavily on environmental conditions because storing energy is actually very inefficient and thus requires even more industry to support. but i suppose for brevity its easier to omit glaring flaws and just paint a disturbingly uncritical view of anything that isnt coal (and gloss over other carbon based energy sources like natural gas).

@tobyfarman 4 года назад

My home country (the UK) hasn't used coal for 2 months. And there are many countries that burn very little or no coal, like Iceland, France, Ireland, Switzerland, Norway etc...

@bonelesswatermelon420 4 года назад

The burning coal kinda looks like Darwin from The Amazing World of Gumball

@jimmyshrimbe9361 4 года назад

I'm very familiar with this, living and growing up in West Virginia.

@jeffbenton6183 2 месяца назад

Its nice to see a video acknowledging that nuclear can be safe and *cheap* at the same time.

@asfsgdwfsfew4fwsdfgwerf232 4 года назад

I heard you can use poop as an alternative to coal! the only down side is you have to heat it up and you probably have to use coal

@lilianayohannes8291 4 года назад

Can you talk about flora foam,how it make it

@tyronepatrick8690 4 года назад

I always use coal in minecraft... No wonder I keep dying

@thatRyzzle 3 года назад

But, that piece of coal looks so happy …

@shawngrant4936 4 года назад

I like the little accents in the character's hair

@desis6608 4 года назад

Coal devil looks 100x more evil than the coal angel looks good in the thumbnail

@pasta_eeee 4 года назад

Haha! This is the earliest I’ve ever been! 😁

@Wyvernnnn 4 года назад

Thanks for including nuclear

@tomnovy3476 3 года назад

we have an giant hole in the front of the house and still no coal

@MrUhlus 4 года назад

why is the person with the phone at 1:43 missing legs

@micaelgarcia1576 4 года назад

Because they were lost in a car accident

@Shadow81989 4 года назад

And here I was, thinking that he simply grew out of the girl's head, like a pot plant!

@MrUhlus 4 года назад

@@micaelgarcia1576 why are they hovering then. they are not standing on anything

@micaelgarcia1576 4 года назад

@@MrUhlus What do you mean hovering? They are all falling at the same rate, it's just that we're watching from their perspective, so they don't look like falling.

@micaelgarcia1576 4 года назад

That also explains the white background; they live in an unlimited universe, and are probably falling to the nearest star.