Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | philipwhiuk's commentslogin

It's LinkedIn speech.

Two word sentences, each one on a new line.


Ah. That might be why I find it especially triggering.

There's a responsible disclosure timeline at the bottom indicating they'd all been fixed.

I think the point is that we don't have evidence that this actually happened from anyone other than Codewall.

Trying to decide whether the mistakes in your response are deliberate or accidental.

Pretty grate either way.

Sure but we can agree there's essentially two parallel industries in web development

Engineer at tech firms and WebShops writing WordPress plugins for single clients where Squarespace doesn't cut it.

Is AI another field of people or is it killing one or both of those. TBD


> The burden is on you to explain why the US should do things the way other countries do. What's better for everyone about that?

In short: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ef/19...


What proportion of road deaths are due to people running red lights versus just driving too fast for conditions, or being impaired at the wheel, or any number of things that these cameras don't enforce?

It's not a bipartisan bill so I would be skeptical on it's ability get signed into law.

Maybe the difference is made up by renewables and not oil?

Natural gas is still the leader by a good margin.

Leading is not the same as replacing. See this figure https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Ireland#/media/File:...

In 2000, coal was about 20% of the energy mix, gas another 20%, oil about 50%. Wind was 0%. In 2024 coal was about 2%, gas still 20%, oil still 50%, but wind grew to about 15%. It seems that wind actually replaced coal. It is not only logical, but good, that wind first replaced coal (dirtiest), and maybe from now on is will start to replace oil. Only after many decades, or maybe never, gas will be replaced.


I'm not sure where that data comes from. Oil was only around 3% in 2024.

https://www.seai.ie/data-and-insights/seai-statistics/electr...


Primary energy compared to electricity as energy. The first adds energy used in driving, chemical industry etc. the second is just the amount of electricity generated.

Got it, thanks. So, not for grid electricity, as in this discussion.

Still, in the second figure of your link, you can see how gas is more or less stable since the start in 2005, and coal + peat is being slowly replaced almost 1:1 by renewables, mainly wind as hydro is stable and solar is marginal in Ireland.

I don't see how that matters to ops comment, "Just in time for an energy crisis", implying a shift to oil from coal.

Presumably it's also counting non-electricity energy generation. Road and rail transport still relies heavily on internal combustion engines.

energy vs electricity. oil is a much bigger part of the energy mix due to chemical manufacturing

No, it's not?

https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/interactive-publications/e...

  crude oil and petroleum products (37.7%)
  natural gas (20.4%)
  renewable energy (19.5%)
  solid fuels (10.6%)
  nuclear energy (11.8%)
(2023 numbers)

So natural gas was just barely more than renewables in 2023, but according to the source below the line was crossed in 2025 and renewables now provide more than all fossil fuels put together:

https://electrek.co/2026/01/21/wind-and-solar-overtook-fossi...


For those following along at home, it appears enir is (edit: as well as using EU wide data, not Irish data..) including non-electricity generation, or non-grid, energy use. Grid stats available here https://www.seai.ie/data-and-insights/seai-statistics/electr...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47308462


Yeah, I think I was a little confused by the context of another thread and did not realize this one was about Ireland specifically.

Not sure what the downvotes are about, that looks to be exactly what happened.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/energy-consumption-by-sou...


It isn’t.

Ireland has essentially no working oil power generation capacity these days (I think the only ones are a couple of small diesel units on islands, which are not even connected to the national grid). Moneypoint was replaced with some combo of wind, gas and imports.

(Moneypoint was actually built originally due to Ireland's over dependence at the time on oil for power generation; after the oil crisis, initially ESB attempted to build a nuclear plant (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnsore_Point#Cancelled_nucle...), but it was such a political minefield that it was canceled, leading to Moneypoint.)


Oil stayed more or less steady, so yes, it did.

> I’m of the opinion that direct air capture is the primary escape hatch we have for not hitting 3 or even 4C warming in the next 100-200 years

Why is it always never 'burn less fossil fuels'.

Anything but the oil company bottom line huh?


We could cease burning all fossil fuels tomorrow and we'd still have to resort to geoengineering. Read the IPCC projections. All of the ones that keep us below 3c require 'negative emissions'. That's code for DAC, a technology that we've only ever deployed to small pilot projects, deployed more widely, more quickly, than we've deployed any technology ever.

TLDR: We're gonna have to use sulfate injection until we can transition our economy


Yes. And if we don't also stop burning fossil fuels then we'll never even break even.

nobody will champion degrowth because it means less profits

The people who say the Earth is flat have been "searching for papers" too.

No offense, but you sound like an oil shill.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: