2 ms·

Let's say there are different opinions on that. I won't adopt definitions forced by countries that also want natural gas plants to be categorized as "green" ("

• fsflover 5y ago
  This is ad hominem. Nuclear doesn't generate the CO2.
  • bipson 5y ago
    Hm, no, I don't think that's ad hominem. I didn't say nuclear does generate CO2. I said it produces waste, and that I have a definition of renewable that does not include nuclear. You first shifted the goalposts and said it is "green" (what is "green"?? who defines "green"?), citing sources. I discredited the sources, since it these are just announcements, made by (political) institutions, where politicians lobby for a re-labeling of certain energy sources, because it suits their agenda. None of this makes nuclear "renewable" in my book. IMO the world renewable implies something in the line of "self-regenerating"/"grows naturally"/"replenishes" and producing toxic waste in my world-view is orthogonal to that meaning. And don't try to explain that nuclear waste is non-toxic, I think my interest in discussing this really ends there.