4 ms·

Well, well, well… The political solution were nuclear plants in the 70’s. They were damned by the Ecologists (at least in Europe). We are reaping what we sowed

• adrianN 5y ago
  Not building more nuclear in the seventies probably was a bad decision. But today it is not at all clear that nuclear is the cheapest solution for carbon-free energy. Neither is it clear whether we can scale nuclear quickly enough.
  • albrewer 5y ago
    If I waited for the clearest, best solution to become apparent to me every time I went to get something done I would still be deciding what food to buy at the grocery store. Sometimes it makes sense to run with a "good enough" solution until something better can be found because the alternative is doing the shitty thing you've always done, or worse, doing nothing at all.
    • adrianN 5y ago
      Renewables could also be the "good enough" solution, at least until 70% penetration or so where you want to start building storage. Starting with those has the benefit that you don't need to sink a couple of billions into a big construction site and then wait 10-15 years before the first kWh comes out. That buys you more time to figure out what the actual best solution is.
• sesuximo 5y ago
  > They were damned by the Ecologists (at least in Europe) This is controversial