Yeah, this line caught my eye, too: “renewables account for 98% of Norway’s electricity system.”
The author conveniently forgot to mention this is only possible because of Norway’s unique location in the world providing plentiful hydro generation.
The author seems to be suggesting or hinting “if Norway can achieve 98% renewables, why can’t all the other countries?” But the author is an idiot. As are the people who conceived and designed this ship.
Another solution in search of problem. It’ll probably attract the “eco tourist” crowd for a while.
If Norway was in kalifornia they would be blowing all those dams to save the endangered spotted snail darter
Causing massive ecological disaster to “save” environment
Only leftist could use that logic
Was talking to a someone and got on the subject of electric cars, solar, wind
Showed him a picture of lithium mines and the carbon footprint of a wind turbine setup and that gasp it needed a whole bunch of oil to run…..
Deer in the headlight look, he really lost it when I called electric cars coal powered
When that ship catches on fire it will be epic
Maybe someone can make a meme with it towing a Honda generator
Almost nothing illustrates the disingenuousness of the Greenies more that their attitude towards hydro. When they’re trying to make the strained case that as ‘renewables’, solar and wind are actually practical, they’ll always include hydro as ‘renewable’, since in most locations, hydro provides more energy (and does so reliably) than windmills and solar panels. Meanwhile, they’ll do everything possible to keep new dams from being built, while also doing what they can to tear down old ones.