4 ms·
>has less regulatory hurdles, >Nuclear plants take ages to build >If nuclear was going to be the answer we missed the chance And who's fault is all that? Yo
by throwaway0a5e 4y ago
>has less regulatory hurdles,
>Nuclear plants take ages to build
>If nuclear was going to be the answer we missed the chance
And who's fault is all that? Your line of reasoning comes across as a little more than tone deaf considering that the current situation with regard to nuclear was the fruit of a prior generation of environmental activism.
- rtkwe 4y agoThey're larger, more complicated, and more dangerous (when done wrong) structures than solar farms. Even without the anti-nuclear turn they would take longer to build and have more strenuous requirements to meet than a solar field...
- throwaway0a5e 4y agoI don't disagree. Solar is the cheaper option. But nuclear is still a viable option and can/should be deployed too. My point is "green" crowd has less than no credibility in people's minds when it comes to nuclear. You people blew your load 30yr ago and other than baiting some people into debating with you online the general public doesn't really trust anything your crowd has to say on nuclear because you've shown your true colors.
- rtkwe 4y ago"You people"? 30 years ago I had just recently started mastering the toilet and was moving on to other things like reading and speaking words other than mama and dada so I'm not sure how much political capital I was exercising during that time period.
- whimsicalism 4y agoSounds like you are being "overly emotional." The climate crisis can't be solved with the blame game.