The next frontier will be meat consumption. Particularly red meat.

A single 1/4 beef hamburger emits 7-12 kg of carbon[1]. Compared to ~1.5kg of carbon driving your car 3 miles[2].

Not telling you to go full vegetarian, but I'm personally far less interested in a beef product unless you're going to guarantee its an extremely expert prepared steak. Most beef is mediocre.

1 - https://ourworldindata.org/environmental-impacts-of-food

2 - https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/greenhouse-gas-emissions-t...

I have heard this news many times, technically not wrong, but each time with a different metric. This time it is production over a year.

It reminds me of the Voyager probes that left the solar system half a dozen times, each time taking a different definition of what marks the edge of the solar system.

Anyways, we are now getting to sensible metrics, which is good.

What is not on the title:

For an entire year, that year being 2025.

Also, yes, absolute generation from fossil fuels is declining quickly. The total generation is changing way more slowly than that share.

Part of this is about a new way to store energy. In the Netherlands, they have started storing heat energy with sand, in Germany, they are using bricks. This has some advantages. It allows the direct use of heat for industrial processes and heating industrial and commercial facilities. They can either convert energy into electricity or use the heat directly. This technology can be used with a wide variety of energy sources. This includes nuclear because it allows thermal storage of excess heat from nuclear energy. This kind of setup is supposed to be more stable for the grid and more reliable for storing energy.

Breaking news: "Wind and solar overtake fossil fuels in <insert_European_country> for the first time" for the 10th time this year.

Also on other unrelated news German economy is rocketing to the bottom, their industry is dying with thousands of layoffs, closing factories, and complains on energy prices and they can't even maintain their rail and road networks for the first time since forever. The signs of decline are not even signs anymore they are bright neon signs. But at least we are taxing cows farting. While china is steamrolling ahead and we are regulated to death by bureaucrats.

The headline should state this is about electricity generation.

If you compare e.g. with a country like Sweden or France they have been free from fossil fuels for electricity since the build outs in the 70s-80s.

Also Germany is an importer of significant electricity (e.g nuclear power from France).

But due to a stagnant economy and no increase in electricity demand - yes, I guess this milestone is now passed...

Some good data on this topic: https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions

I love renewables, but the problem with solar is the lack of inertia (literally). Big spinning masses like steam turbines have an easier time staying on network frequency. Wind turbines better than solar of course so I hope we continue to have diversity there.

It's a good news and a milestone to celebrate but if we count all energy and not only electricity and not only developed world then the progress is not as fast unfortunately [1].

Not a long time ago I've seen a post arguing based on the data [1] that renewables are irrelevant and should not be taken seriously and fossils will the main source for the lifetime.

[1] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-energy-substitutio...

Cheap, renewable energy offers a competitive advantage to manufacturing and AI.

This undoubtedly explains why the current US administration is openly hostile to it.

does natural gas count as fossil fuels here?

Thank goodness the energy policy of the US is being dictated by a single, highly intelligent man that isn't falling for the clean energy hoax, a man who consistently puts the interests of the people over his own interests. It's sad that the rest of the world is falling for this scam. </sarcasm; gosh, i hope it was obvious>

Now they just gotta get the good ole DB to run on time.

I'm confused by the US conservatives' full court press for fossil fuels and against wind/solar. I believe it's mostly about protecting existing money/power structures, but I don't really know. I mean, where does all Trump's energy on this topic come from? Is it owning the libs or courting donors or the Heritage Foundation/AEI?

If it's really about protecting fossil fuel wealth, is there a long-term plan or are they just juicing quarterly earnings as long as they can? Is there a serious belief that wind/solar is a fad?

This isn't the kind of thought that begets rational discussion, but if you can avoid cynicism and sarcasm, I am curious to hear what the smart people of HN think.

[dead]

Imagine how much better carbon emissions would be in Germany if they hadn't dismantled nuclear!

https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/FR/live/fifteen_min... Anyone is free to compare France and Germany here.

Now we know why El Niño is particularly bad this year, all those windmills slowing down the jet stream.

The total carbon emission of Germany in 2024 as a percentage of whole world is 1.5% (https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by...). Even if Germany goes carbon neutral tomorrow, it wouldn't make any difference on global climate, but there would be millions of Germans on Bürgergeld (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%BCrgergeld)