4 ms·
Finally some real science on this topic. Not against nuclear energy, but as a solution to climate change it did get some very unscientific arguments.
by raxxorrax 5y ago
Finally some real science on this topic. Not against nuclear energy, but as a solution to climate change it did get some very unscientific arguments.
- cinntaile 5y agoIt might not be the cheapest solution, but that it wouldn't be a solution to climate changes doesn't sound right. It doesn't use much resources, the plants last 40-80 years and there is hardly any CO2eq/kWh. You also need some form of storage or geographical interconnection for when renewables underperform. Which the sun does during the night and the wind does during certain, unpredictable intervals. You can build more than you need to increase the baseline, but this has an economic cost of course. It would also lower profitability when it does deliver.