4 ms·
If it’s safe it should be done. Anything that can create pressure to end the war should be done. One other thing is that while natural gas is “cleaner”, it’s c
by brohoolio 5y ago
If it’s safe it should be done. Anything that can create pressure to end the war should be done.
One other thing is that while natural gas is “cleaner”, it’s clear that leaks in the natural gas infrastructure are putting way more methane into the air than previously realized. I’m not sure you can trust countries such as Russia to have strong policies in place to make sure wells are properly sealed.
- cinntaile 5y agoKeeping the last 3 power plants online will not create any pressure, it just won't further increase Russia's already strong negotiation position.
- eloff 5y agoI think you mean to say natural gas is cleaner than coal. It's obviously not cleaner than nuclear.
- The_rationalist 5y ago
- mrtksn 5y agoI would like to see Nuclear Power plants working up until we convert everything into renewables. Use the much needed energy to build renewable systems from the already existing Nuclear Power generation capacity. Very unpopular opinion around here but I think the future is not Nuclear. Besides the unsolved problems of nuclear waste, It employs huge risks and it is safe the exactly the same way the airlines are safe: high quality operations. I simply don't trust that the excellence displayed by most of the current operators will be scaled to %100 of the operators and even a few disasters is way too many(again, very similar to airlines). We also witnessed that NPPs can be targeted by military forces, just yesterday. This time nothing happened but it could have happened. You might have missle proof reactors but you still need the support personel to be alive and operational to keep the thing safe. Also, a warlord might decide that it is a good idea to sabotage a captured facility to achieve some strategic goal(after all, these are people who use destruction and murders as tools and they do threaten with nuclear warfare).