3 ms·

You've demonstrated my point. You're pointing out some valid concerns. They're insignificant in comparison to the fossil fuel alternative. Environmentalists mak

You've demonstrated my point. You're pointing out some valid concerns. They're insignificant in comparison to the fossil fuel alternative. Environmentalists make perfect the enemy of good every time.

southerntofu 6y ago
> They're insignificant in comparison to the fossil fuel alternative. Weighing options is a good stance, but i'm pretty sure "insignificant" is not the word to describe problems caused by the nuclear industry. I don't want to sound judgy, but feel free to do some reading on the topic. Also, you seem to dismiss my central point that nuclear doesn't work without considerable amounts of fossil fuel. Even if that were the case, what is it powering? Almost all these electric devices use lithium which also takes a lot of fossil fuel to extract and refine. It would be interesting to read a full study on the requirements on fossil fuel to produce an electric car and feed it over its lifetime (accounting for the short life of electric batteries), depending on how energy is produced. I'm not entirely sure, but it may be just as bad as a combustion car. For hybrids, it's not even a debate as they get the environmental downsides of both worlds.
- jjoonathan 6y ago
  The nuclear industry often complains that their critics are incapable of division, and you sure seem to be proving them correct. In the USA, nuclear has 10x the install base of wind. If it were equally problematic, you should expect 10x the problems. The ratio is probably higher in France. > nuclear doesn't work without considerable amounts of fossil fuel. Ditto wind, ditto solar. They are considerably worse once you divide by the power they actually produce, as you should. With wind, you build a gigantic edifice of concrete and steel, and it powers a neighborhood, some of the time. With nuclear, you build a gigantic edifice of concrete and steel, and it powers multiple cities, all of the time. https://www.factcheck.org/2018/03/wind-energys-carbon-footprint/ https://www.factcheck.org/2018/03/wind-energys-carbon-footpr... > It would be interesting to read a full study on the requirements on fossil fuel to produce an electric car Dude, this is electric car 101 stuff. If you haven't found these studies, it's because you weren't looking.

You've demonstrated my point. You're pointing out some valid concerns. They're insignificant in comparison to the fossil fuel alternative. Environmentalists make perfect the enemy of good every time.

southerntofu 6y ago

> They're insignificant in comparison to the fossil fuel alternative. Weighing options is a good stance, but i'm pretty sure "insignificant" is not the word to describe problems caused by the nuclear industry. I don't want to sound judgy, but feel free to do some reading on the topic. Also, you seem to dismiss my central point that nuclear doesn't work without considerable amounts of fossil fuel. Even if that were the case, what is it powering? Almost all these electric devices use lithium which also takes a lot of fossil fuel to extract and refine. It would be interesting to read a full study on the requirements on fossil fuel to produce an electric car and feed it over its lifetime (accounting for the short life of electric batteries), depending on how energy is produced. I'm not entirely sure, but it may be just as bad as a combustion car. For hybrids, it's not even a debate as they get the environmental downsides of both worlds.

jjoonathan 6y ago
The nuclear industry often complains that their critics are incapable of division, and you sure seem to be proving them correct. In the USA, nuclear has 10x the install base of wind. If it were equally problematic, you should expect 10x the problems. The ratio is probably higher in France. > nuclear doesn't work without considerable amounts of fossil fuel. Ditto wind, ditto solar. They are considerably worse once you divide by the power they actually produce, as you should. With wind, you build a gigantic edifice of concrete and steel, and it powers a neighborhood, some of the time. With nuclear, you build a gigantic edifice of concrete and steel, and it powers multiple cities, all of the time. https://www.factcheck.org/2018/03/wind-energys-carbon-footprint/ https://www.factcheck.org/2018/03/wind-energys-carbon-footpr... > It would be interesting to read a full study on the requirements on fossil fuel to produce an electric car Dude, this is electric car 101 stuff. If you haven't found these studies, it's because you weren't looking.