Tankers are more exposed and there are fewer large oil ports. An attack on them has much more severe consequences and repair is difficult due to contamination.
Well, we are not deciding between perfectly decentralized infrastructure and off shore wind farms, but fossil fuels or off shore wind farms.
Or, more honestly building Windparks and not building Windparks. We might not like that this is the reality but we cannot change that, in my mind.
Unlike the totally un-bombable tanker ships and pipelines we use now.
or undersea cables… wait… i’ve seen this movie on the news
guess we should abandon undersea cables in favour of starlink
The difference is how exposed they are.
It is kinda like, would you rather build a powerplant on the border of Russia, or far more centrally.
Both can be destroyed, but one invites destruction faster
Tankers are more exposed and there are fewer large oil ports. An attack on them has much more severe consequences and repair is difficult due to contamination.
Ok, now you have changed the argument, I never said that wind farms are the most exposed and vulnerable of any power infrastructure.
I simply said that being exposed was a problem for wind farms, this does not discount any other issues with other energy types.
Well, we are not deciding between perfectly decentralized infrastructure and off shore wind farms, but fossil fuels or off shore wind farms. Or, more honestly building Windparks and not building Windparks. We might not like that this is the reality but we cannot change that, in my mind.
Change must happen, and quickly and economically.