Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I brought up the recycling program because it's an important part of the life-cycle of the technology and it wasn't really discussed in the article. As I implied in my comment, I'm fully in favor if something can be done about the loads of plastic that this process will produce. As was mentioned, even 100% recyclable doesn't mean anywhere close to 100% will be recycled unless it is prioritized by the producers and consumers of the product.

I recently finished "The World Without Us" by Alan Weisman, and his discussion about the long-term impacts of our reliance on plastics struck me as a very under-appreciated burden on the environment - a huge amount ends up in the ocean, where it breaks apart but doesn't actually go away - it just becomes bite-size for smaller and smaller organisms, with predictable effects along the food chain.

I am wary of a "race to the bottom" in terms of cost/watt because it undervalues other aspects of energy production, where the "good enough" mentality hasn't turned out very well in the past (nuclear and coal in particular). This particular technology seems aimed more at being financially-sensible, and I am concerned that the long-term environmental impacts are not being weighed heavily. It's important to factor in the cost, convenience, and logistics of the whole life-cycle of a technology, not just the cost/watt for a limited time frame.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: