3 ms·

It's absolutely crazy, but in line with what's going on with energy demand out of control due to cryptocurrencies sprouting everywhere: some countries banned no

It's absolutely crazy, but in line with what's going on with energy demand out of control due to cryptocurrencies sprouting everywhere: some countries banned non green energy sources, so we redefine the word green. Bravo! That's exactly what one can expect from corrupt politicians. I would accept to go back to nuclear only in one case: whoever is pushing for it will build their house within 10 Km of either a nuclear plant, or where nuclear waste is stored.

fennecfoxen 5y ago
I'd do it in principle, but the Nevada climate near Yucca Mountain's a bit dry for my liking. Also, that whole state has a gambling problem and that kind of culture is much more of a turn-off than a little nuclear waste.
xigoi 5y ago
Living near a nuclear plant is safer than near a coal plant.
Joeri 5y ago
I’m in favor of the eventual phase out of nuclear fission power but we have to be pragmatic about the situation we are in. Reaching 1.5 degrees of warming is all but impossible by now because we’ve waited too long. We no longer have the luxury of making choices between approaches. By now we have to do everything we can, and doing so we will still fall short. There’s a nuclear industry ready and willing to be a part of the (temporary) solution, and that’s why the IPCC’s evaluation a few years ago of 85 plans to reach 1.5 degrees of warming noted that nearly all involve nuclear energy and on average a doubling of the nuclear energy share to around 5%. Since that report we are even further from where we need to be. So we need to put the nuclear industry to work and I think everyone looking at the climate crisis pragmatically can see that this is necessary. Other pragmatic choices are replacing coal with gas in the short term (because it can be built rapidly and produces far less emissions) and globally outlawing proof of work crypto.
sideshowb 5y ago
checks map. I live within 10k of a nuke. Never really think about it tbh. Happy to take more nukes over global warming, though more wind/solar plus storage would beat either, so whatever works really. Calling gas green though? Screw that, unless it's got 100 percent carbon capture or something.
vanusa 5y ago
A flip argument. By that token -- if you advocate of, for example, EVs then I trust you'll be more than happy to move to an area where the freshwater has been diverted to support lithium extraction. Or if you're a fan of solar power, you'd be delighted to send your kids off to the DRC to work in a cobalt mine.

fennecfoxen 5y ago

I'd do it in principle, but the Nevada climate near Yucca Mountain's a bit dry for my liking. Also, that whole state has a gambling problem and that kind of culture is much more of a turn-off than a little nuclear waste.

xigoi 5y ago

Living near a nuclear plant is safer than near a coal plant.

Joeri 5y ago

I’m in favor of the eventual phase out of nuclear fission power but we have to be pragmatic about the situation we are in. Reaching 1.5 degrees of warming is all but impossible by now because we’ve waited too long. We no longer have the luxury of making choices between approaches. By now we have to do everything we can, and doing so we will still fall short. There’s a nuclear industry ready and willing to be a part of the (temporary) solution, and that’s why the IPCC’s evaluation a few years ago of 85 plans to reach 1.5 degrees of warming noted that nearly all involve nuclear energy and on average a doubling of the nuclear energy share to around 5%. Since that report we are even further from where we need to be. So we need to put the nuclear industry to work and I think everyone looking at the climate crisis pragmatically can see that this is necessary. Other pragmatic choices are replacing coal with gas in the short term (because it can be built rapidly and produces far less emissions) and globally outlawing proof of work crypto.

sideshowb 5y ago

checks map. I live within 10k of a nuke. Never really think about it tbh. Happy to take more nukes over global warming, though more wind/solar plus storage would beat either, so whatever works really. Calling gas green though? Screw that, unless it's got 100 percent carbon capture or something.

vanusa 5y ago

A flip argument. By that token -- if you advocate of, for example, EVs then I trust you'll be more than happy to move to an area where the freshwater has been diverted to support lithium extraction. Or if you're a fan of solar power, you'd be delighted to send your kids off to the DRC to work in a cobalt mine.