this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2026
312 points (98.1% liked)

World News

58063 readers
1637 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

What happens to decommissioned wind turbines and blades? Some are finding new life as buildings.

Europe is on track for a record wind year, with 8.8 GW of new capacity installed in the first half of 2026 – a 30 per cent jump year on year.

That’s enough electricity to power around seven million European households and replace fossil fuel imports equivalent to 25 LNG tankers a year, according to industry nonprofit WindEurope.

But every turbine that goes up eventually means one coming down – and manufacturers are still working out how to make sure none of the materials go to waste.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] crashfrog@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It’s so absurd; it’s more expensive to convert a container into a home than to just build the home on site

[–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Really? Do you have actual info on this?

[–] crashfrog@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

The structural rigidity of an ISO shipping container comes from the corrugated walls; that’s how you can stack them. The walls have to be continuous for that to work. Once you start cutting holes in the walls to have windows and doors, you need to retrofit a stiffening frame or the container isn’t rigid enough. You need framing anyway in order to insulate and finish the interior walls.

But if you’re just going to put up a frame anyway, you may as well timber-frame a similar sized structure. You’re not getting anything from the container except a roof and two doors you won’t use, and it’s pretty cheap to roof a small structure too. Plus a lot of “container homes” wind up roofing the container anyway, since the used ones tend to have leaks.

It’s be cheaper to traditionally frame a same-sized structure and just make it look like a shipping container.