You put your own twist on the game and commentary and fluent it as well as a BFC being launched through the air, but by god are you entertaining to watch.
Im 3 minutes in and when frazz suggested just sticking a turbine in the ocean to make power nicely and safely i recoiled, and just to point this out, in terms of cost-energy produced or just how effectively you collect energy solar SUCKS. Its cery expensive and dosent even collect most of the energy that hits it. (These being photovoltaic cells, i dont know the efficiency of mirror arrays)
I never suggested just sticking them in the ocean. Scotland already has a vast array of under water turbines that power Scotland. Scotland for about 90% of its electricity comes from renewables now. And Scotland is also the ones that pioneered the under water hydro systems.
Green energy is very uneficient at thys stage. Solar power and wind turbines are too expensive to build and maintain, they will never refund. And BIO mass is less efficient than coal, only diference is that you need to burn more plants than coal to generate the same ammount of energy. Under water power plants also cause enviroment devastation because you have to use a lot of resources to build it and maintain. All that thinking "nuclear is bad" is because of Chernobyl. And do you know why accident happend? Because noone cared. It was builded wrong, maitained wrong, even rescue teams didn't know what to do. But it was USSR where noone cared about anything.
Smash GaminG!! - Frazzz , i think Voyo put my point better than i did, and while it is true scotland has uses underwater turbines, the project was a MASSIVE investment that likely would not be implemented on the scale that you mentioned. Also, there is the fact that the turbines scotland uses are tidal turbines, which dont actually work everywhere as they need a very strong tide to spin the blades.
@@voyomaypl1608 4 things: #1: Learn spelling. #2: How does spending resources on the underwater turbine devastate the environment? #3: Better green energy is always being developed. #4: There will be noone to care about how inefficient green energy is if everyone's dead from pollution. P.S. I use an electric car.
@@lunasagaming5801 #1 I'm still learning english so I can make mistakes. #2 Spending resaurces mean: you have to dig them, refine, produce parts, put them together and transport. All these things use energy that we are talking about. Remember: energy isn't only electricity. #3 of course that it will be better but now it cost more than produced energy is worth. So if you want +200% hike of electricity price i can't blame you. #4 that's both true and falce. Because you assume that we will never use green energy and die. That's not true. In your opinion people are blind and don't improve antyhing, just wait to die. Shortly: environment degradation > natural disasters > skared people > motivated people > more monney for research > beter green tech etc. One thing humans are good at is adapting to world around them, and one day they will adapt more green tech. But not now, we have to further develop and research green energy production and than use it. Ps. Good for you. But chinese factory that made parts probaply dumped all chemical waists to river. Action and reaction.
@@danilofranke4918 Knowing that nuclear fusion creates more energy than nuclear fission doesn't mean you know all about nuclear physics. Also, if the governments of the world invested more into nuclear fusion tech instead of military... fusion tech military. nuclear fusion submarines. everything.
@@jacobberube3826 well I think nuclear is better cause they can be really everywhere. And if I understand hydroelectric right and I'm not being dumb then you can only put hydroelectric electricity plants near a current right?
Even factoring in all 2 meltdowns in history(one was Russia's incompetence and the other was Japan getting hit by a earthquake and either a tsunami or monsoon(idr which atm)at the same time)it's still much safer
![Giant Rockets From Space! (Rocket Engine Mods) - Forts RTS [162]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/V4YrmmPcdyQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Damn watching frazz do nothing while his 6000 metal weapon got slowly sniped was too painful lmao
Same
You put your own twist on the game and commentary and fluent it as well as a BFC being launched through the air, but by god are you entertaining to watch.
Im 3 minutes in and when frazz suggested just sticking a turbine in the ocean to make power nicely and safely i recoiled, and just to point this out, in terms of cost-energy produced or just how effectively you collect energy solar SUCKS. Its cery expensive and dosent even collect most of the energy that hits it. (These being photovoltaic cells, i dont know the efficiency of mirror arrays)
I never suggested just sticking them in the ocean. Scotland already has a vast array of under water turbines that power Scotland. Scotland for about 90% of its electricity comes from renewables now. And Scotland is also the ones that pioneered the under water hydro systems.
Green energy is very uneficient at thys stage. Solar power and wind turbines are too expensive to build and maintain, they will never refund. And BIO mass is less efficient than coal, only diference is that you need to burn more plants than coal to generate the same ammount of energy.
Under water power plants also cause enviroment devastation because you have to use a lot of resources to build it and maintain.
All that thinking "nuclear is bad" is because of Chernobyl. And do you know why accident happend? Because noone cared. It was builded wrong, maitained wrong, even rescue teams didn't know what to do. But it was USSR where noone cared about anything.
Smash GaminG!! - Frazzz , i think Voyo put my point better than i did, and while it is true scotland has uses underwater turbines, the project was a MASSIVE investment that likely would not be implemented on the scale that you mentioned. Also, there is the fact that the turbines scotland uses are tidal turbines, which dont actually work everywhere as they need a very strong tide to spin the blades.
@@voyomaypl1608 4 things: #1: Learn spelling. #2: How does spending resources on the underwater turbine devastate the environment? #3: Better green energy is always being developed. #4: There will be noone to care about how inefficient green energy is if everyone's dead from pollution. P.S. I use an electric car.
@@lunasagaming5801 #1 I'm still learning english so I can make mistakes. #2 Spending resaurces mean: you have to dig them, refine, produce parts, put them together and transport. All these things use energy that we are talking about. Remember: energy isn't only electricity. #3 of course that it will be better but now it cost more than produced energy is worth. So if you want +200% hike of electricity price i can't blame you. #4 that's both true and falce. Because you assume that we will never use green energy and die. That's not true. In your opinion people are blind and don't improve antyhing, just wait to die. Shortly: environment degradation > natural disasters > skared people > motivated people > more monney for research > beter green tech etc. One thing humans are good at is adapting to world around them, and one day they will adapt more green tech. But not now, we have to further develop and research green energy production and than use it.
Ps. Good for you. But chinese factory that made parts probaply dumped all chemical waists to river. Action and reaction.
so much redundant tech placed by the frazzles
Nuclear energy is best
@@danilofranke4918 Knowing that nuclear fusion creates more energy than nuclear fission doesn't mean you know all about nuclear physics. Also, if the governments of the world invested more into nuclear fusion tech instead of military... fusion tech military. nuclear fusion submarines. everything.
Fusion is the eventual future of energy. just always 20 years in the future
35:44 "GET OVER HERE!"
Legitimately thought this game was lost for you. PLOT TWIST: FRAZZZ WON
Nuclear is safe and clean, unless someone blows the station up then... Ye
hydroelectric is better
Jacob bérubé my province is powered 98% by hydro
@@jacobberube3826 false
@@flamegator3251 I live in quebec so its true search and you will find
@@jacobberube3826 well I think nuclear is better cause they can be really everywhere. And if I understand hydroelectric right and I'm not being dumb then you can only put hydroelectric electricity plants near a current right?
frazz try using oil dirks
Dericks*
@@zedukelstarstryker9875 Derricks**
@@lunasagaming5801 Derrricks***
Great episode, I loved it!
Yes my minion
Love your vids
Funny forts
Its a piece of koek
i am a dutch person and i found it very funny because koek means cookie in english.
Hi
Stop saying get
Dutch?
yes
ja
50 51
Oof
Them: Nuclear energy is safer than solar and wind power.
Me: What if a nuclear meltdown happens?
Even factoring in all 2 meltdowns in history(one was Russia's incompetence and the other was Japan getting hit by a earthquake and either a tsunami or monsoon(idr which atm)at the same time)it's still much safer
Fist
Ha
Yep you are ):
I know I spelled it wrong