4 ms·
The entire planet could burn and the oceans could rise, displacing hundreds of millions of people all while droughts and famine are widespread. That's what wil
by orthecreedence 5y ago
The entire planet could burn and the oceans could rise, displacing hundreds of millions of people all while droughts and famine are widespread.
That's what will go wrong if we don't start looking at nuclear.
- saagarjha 5y agoNuclear isn't the old low-emissions power source.
- orthecreedence 5y agoRight, it's the only low-emissions power source that is available at-scale.
- 7952 5y agoIn it's current form it isn't scalable compared to renewables. Maybe modular reactors will change that.
- jsilence 5y agoInstead of starting research on safe nuclear options, with results who knows when, we should go all in TODAY on established and safe regenerative energy options available right now: Solar and Wind. Every cent we invest in nuclear research is lost to the immediate solutions.
- acidburnNSA 5y ago> Every cent we invest in nuclear research is lost to the immediate solutions. This would only be true if 100% of GDP was spent on climate solutions. In reality, it's not a zero sum game like this. If some people get excited about nuclear and want to invest while others are excited about wind and solar, then that's great. The more the merrier!
- orthecreedence 5y agoSolar and wind can only generate depending on weather, which is now constantly changing in unexpected ways. Good luck building battery arrays that can power cities for weeks at a time during cloudy periods. No, nuclear is the only way forward. We know it can work. We need to invest now. Solar and wind cannot power our collective needs, and even if they could, to build it out would require such a massive doubling-down in fossil fuels that the planet would be one big desert by the time we finished.
- jsilence 5y agoIt has been scientifically proven that solar and wind can easily cover our collective need. Please stop spreading this lie.
- Accujack 5y agoThat's news to almost all scientists and many solar and wind farm companies. Do you have a peer reviewed paper or two "proving" this?
- orthecreedence 5y agoExplain how, please.
- throwawayboise 5y agoWe don't need to "start looking at nuclear" we know how to do it perfectly well. We just need to start building reactors again.
- LatteLazy 5y agoIt's a bit late to start the experiment if we need 20,000 working models in the next 6m to avoid climate change. That's the issue with nuclear: to late.
- orthecreedence 5y agoToo late is much better than "cannot work at all" which is what solar and wind give us. What makes you think solar and wind are up to the task right now? They cannot possibly power our collective needs, and even if they could, we have nowhere to store the energy at night or on cloudy/calm days. Energy storage is not a solved problem, and it will not be a solved problem for the next decade. In the meantime, we need to build nuclear reactors now.
- LatteLazy 5y agoYou realise you're planning for peak load grid management for 50 years after the collapse of society right? No one will need to power their ipad when food shortages have killed 50% of the population and the rest are fighting a war over access to water...
- jsilence 5y agoYes, and don't forget the radioactive hybrid terror pigs: https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/01/radioactive_hybrid_terror_pigs_fukushima/ https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/01/radioactive_hybrid_te...