3 ms·

I don't understand how your response relates to the article. Only two of the ten arguments apply to existing reactors: cascading accidents from internal or exte

I don't understand how your response relates to the article. Only two of the ten arguments apply to existing reactors: cascading accidents from internal or external problems some of which will be amplified by climate change, and dealing with nuclear waste. His position is that building more reactors isn't the most effective method for combating climate change, primarily because the vast majority of reactor projects have been massively late and massively over-budget. Because of this, the window for investment in nuclear to stop the most severe results of climate change has already passed. If he has argued for shutting down existing reactors then I apologize, but to me that is a major misrepresentation of the argument.

MrYellowP 5y ago
I'm sorry. Let me explain. My perspective is a european one. Germany turned off three of its reactors while at the same time tons of people are screaming out of their lungs that it's a really bad idea doing so, because of technical reasons related to the safety of the european power grid. From our, the people's perspective, we should only care about making sure that the power keeps running, while it does so without harming the environment more than really necessary. I don't care about governments building new reactors when they shut down the old ones. New ones aren't going to help us, when the grid starts to fail, because they're not even going to be built yet. Talking about new reactors is just distracting from the fact that powergrids need to be in order, which apparently they aren't. The reason, why talking about new reactors is a waste of time, is because more reactors help NOTHING when the powergrid fails, which is a far more pressing matter than literally anything else related to power and energy. The reason, why my words don't really relate to the article, is because it's bullshit. Complete, utter bullshit.

MrYellowP 5y ago

I'm sorry. Let me explain. My perspective is a european one. Germany turned off three of its reactors while at the same time tons of people are screaming out of their lungs that it's a really bad idea doing so, because of technical reasons related to the safety of the european power grid. From our, the people's perspective, we should only care about making sure that the power keeps running, while it does so without harming the environment more than really necessary. I don't care about governments building new reactors when they shut down the old ones. New ones aren't going to help us, when the grid starts to fail, because they're not even going to be built yet. Talking about new reactors is just distracting from the fact that powergrids need to be in order, which apparently they aren't. The reason, why talking about new reactors is a waste of time, is because more reactors help NOTHING when the powergrid fails, which is a far more pressing matter than literally anything else related to power and energy. The reason, why my words don't really relate to the article, is because it's bullshit. Complete, utter bullshit.