4 ms·

Nuclear power has been topdown and hierarchical. These women want to change that

erentz 5y ago
> Second, nuclear advocates have traditionally been, well, men. And not just any men, but the kind of men highly prone to mansplaining why they are rational and you are an over-emotional hysteric. (“Nuclear bros,” in the online argot.) I’ve not seen this at all. But no wonder the planet is in so much trouble. It never has anything to do with right/wrong. What’s rational or what’s not. It’s always perception and feeling driving things. Let’s be clear. The nuclear advocates have been right for a long time. And just now some environmental groups and leaders are slowly catching on. But instead of just moving on with the business that needs to be done, we first have to make up an explanation for why it’s not actually the environmental groups or politicians that were wrong, but actually all the fault of these nuclear advocates, sorry Nuclear-bros.
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  > The nuclear advocates have been right for a long time No, I don't believe so. My country stopped NPP and it was a bit hasted but not wrong. Nuclear isn't carbon neutral, there is lag between planning and operation, you create nuclear waste, mining uranium creates health risks, it is extremely expensive, it binds money that would go to renewables. There is a reason why nuclear will never be much larger than 10% of the energy mix worldwide. There will be some exceptions to this. For Canada and some other countries it might be feasible although they have to look if operation is worth it if other countries use alternatives. It is better than burning coal, certainly true, but every form of energy generation has disadvantages. This idea described in the article is quite stupid, but still an entertaining read. It is a strategy for a target group you could probably sell anything to and that is why rationality is probably not effective, not that I believe it was a too rational decision that formed the early waves of protests. But those people also have been correct about the dangers in my opinion. You shouldn't eat certain fungi in some parts of Europe even today. The advantage of Fukushima was that water is a great radiation absorber. But the risk remains.

> Second, nuclear advocates have traditionally been, well, men. And not just any men, but the kind of men highly prone to mansplaining why they are rational and you are an over-emotional hysteric. (“Nuclear bros,” in the online argot.) I’ve not seen this at all. But no wonder the planet is in so much trouble. It never has anything to do with right/wrong. What’s rational or what’s not. It’s always perception and feeling driving things. Let’s be clear. The nuclear advocates have been right for a long time. And just now some environmental groups and leaders are slowly catching on. But instead of just moving on with the business that needs to be done, we first have to make up an explanation for why it’s not actually the environmental groups or politicians that were wrong, but actually all the fault of these nuclear advocates, sorry Nuclear-bros.

raxxorrax 5y ago
> The nuclear advocates have been right for a long time No, I don't believe so. My country stopped NPP and it was a bit hasted but not wrong. Nuclear isn't carbon neutral, there is lag between planning and operation, you create nuclear waste, mining uranium creates health risks, it is extremely expensive, it binds money that would go to renewables. There is a reason why nuclear will never be much larger than 10% of the energy mix worldwide. There will be some exceptions to this. For Canada and some other countries it might be feasible although they have to look if operation is worth it if other countries use alternatives. It is better than burning coal, certainly true, but every form of energy generation has disadvantages. This idea described in the article is quite stupid, but still an entertaining read. It is a strategy for a target group you could probably sell anything to and that is why rationality is probably not effective, not that I believe it was a too rational decision that formed the early waves of protests. But those people also have been correct about the dangers in my opinion. You shouldn't eat certain fungi in some parts of Europe even today. The advantage of Fukushima was that water is a great radiation absorber. But the risk remains.