4 ms·
Well the consequences of a dodgy nuclear plant operator are potentially pretty disastrous (see Japan). That said, I completely agree that burning lignite is sh
by cycomanic 5y ago
Well the consequences of a dodgy nuclear plant operator are potentially pretty disastrous (see Japan).
That said, I completely agree that burning lignite is shameful, I would argue that it has nothing to do with nuclear or renewables, it's politics.
Regarding gas, both nuclear and most renewables are not really in the same category as gas in terms of the supply they provide. Gas would be just as necessary if all current goal plants are nuclear (or wind for that matter). It might very well be that gas would allow to reduce CO2 emissions and transition to renewables more quickly than without.
I agree with the geopolitical implications, but Germany is producing lots of things in China and are delivering weapons to Saudi Arabia and now we suddenly take a stance when it comes to gas from Russia? In terms of environmental impact it's still better than developing reserves from fracking.
- morelisp 5y ago> now we suddenly take a stance when it comes to gas from Russia? So we can hype up renewables even though we know we can't really build enough fast enough, completely throw out nuclear because of the hypothetical risk of some future corrupt politician coming into control of our waste pile, then when it comes to gas we suddenly take a Realpolitik stance but only as it pertains to the despot next door?