Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
But I have to wonder if Edison's vision of a DC electrical grid might have been environmentally better in the long run, as it would have been very, very decentralized, with a small power station necessary every couple of kilometers. It might have spurred an accelerated study into renewable sources of electricity, such as wind, even decades and decades ago.
As things turned out, Tesla/Westinghouse's victory with AC allows these centralized and "too big to fail" behemoths to suck coal and spit out black smoke out of sight and out of mind for most people.
Bold of you to assume that wouldn't have just resulted in a coal burning power station every couple kilometers...
At first, absolutely yes, coal smoke everywhere, creating an untenable crisis within the cities themselves. That type of crisis would have been tackled as a priority, would have been an integral part of the loudest political dialogues and arguments, decades ago.
They already had coal pollution everywhere. And they had a solution for that.
Which was "make the poor people live in the path of the smoke".
That can't be done as easily if you have a power plant every mile or so. The issue would affect everyone to some extent, rich and poor. That would have been the issue with Direct Current, it would have been impossible to keep it out of sight and out of mind.
Most of those would be small though. Like the size of a small factory. And most people in the UK would have had plenty of those within a mile of their house, right up until we offloaded all our manufacturing to China.
Even a full sized coal plant isn't objectionably dirty enough that people would demand an alternative. We only moved mostly to gas because it was cheaper (and that's where renewables will eventually win again). There's one less than two miles from my house. It would be nice if it wasn't there, but the air is far from unbreathable. If a small coal plant every few miles was the price of having electricity, people would put up with it.
I get what your saying, but I think the benefits of DC power plants would have been short term, rather than long term.
Once scaling was introduced there's no way Edison DC power stations every block would make any sense materially, financially or societally.
I can't blame Tesla for toxic capitalism any more than I can blame the wright brothers for manipulative airline ticket prices today.
Same reason we didn't have electric cars a hundred years ago
Unregulated capitalism and undeveloped antitrust laws are the culprit with respect to centralization, not innovation.