03-23-2019, 02:47 PM
Just finished a new chapter in my gameplay, initially we're going with 3 nuclear power plants and seeing if the power demand continues to increase at its current rate and build more if necessary, then using all the left over worker manpower to build renewables and dismantle coal gives us a window of green energy by 2050, until then we either use coal at current rate and build renewables to slowly catch up, or we build nuclear to dismantle coal by 2030 and then have a nuclear - renewable base until we get to a full renewable by 2050. Thats the earliest assuming levels of government investment we're not going to see. Germany is an entirely different beast due to the ability to purchase green power infrastructure from smaller nations, but a small nation like mine starting to do green doesn't have the ability to buy the production of other countries or they'll risk a trade war with germany, so thats out the window if you know the national background. Its like saying we'd be safe remaining energy dependant on russia.
So 2030 no coal and 2050 all renewable. Coal will still be 10% to keep technology alive and to keep a wide resource base for generation but thats still pretty good. Until I read the manpower data I was also against the nuclear power plants but now that I've read the data I see no other way to keep up our environmental promises than to build them, seeing as how coal is several orders of magnitude more dangerous.
Even with calculating nuclear disasters by the worst data available coal is still much more dangerous in its fatality to people than fukushima, thsernobyl and all the others combined, so lack of options unless someone invents fusion in the next near while.
Now I at least know the data.
On that point, if we use 73% VAT we can fund all programs to absolute full, build 3 times more hospitals ETC, increase GDP per capita and have 0 other taxes and reduce poverty, that would be mercentalism at its finest.
Here are the datasets and simulator I used.
So 2030 no coal and 2050 all renewable. Coal will still be 10% to keep technology alive and to keep a wide resource base for generation but thats still pretty good. Until I read the manpower data I was also against the nuclear power plants but now that I've read the data I see no other way to keep up our environmental promises than to build them, seeing as how coal is several orders of magnitude more dangerous.
Even with calculating nuclear disasters by the worst data available coal is still much more dangerous in its fatality to people than fukushima, thsernobyl and all the others combined, so lack of options unless someone invents fusion in the next near while.
Now I at least know the data.
On that point, if we use 73% VAT we can fund all programs to absolute full, build 3 times more hospitals ETC, increase GDP per capita and have 0 other taxes and reduce poverty, that would be mercentalism at its finest.
Here are the datasets and simulator I used.