3 ms·
I think it's good to recognise gas and nuclear as being preferable to coal and oil, but green they are not. I consider them transitional energy sources; we will
by mcv 4y ago
I think it's good to recognise gas and nuclear as being preferable to coal and oil, but green they are not. I consider them transitional energy sources; we will be stuck with them for a long time while we transition to greener energy, but coal and oil need to be stopped as soon as possible.
After the Fukushima disaster, Germany closed its nuclear power plants and replaced them with coal plans; absolutely the worst possible reaction to that disaster. We do need a middle category to recognise that nuclear and gas are better than coal and oil, but I really don't want energy companies selling me nuclear and gas power as part of my green energy subscription.
- viscountchocula 4y agoI get why gas isn't green, but why isn't nuclear?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- mcv 4y agoNuclear waste. Also, nuclear disasters tend to be quite dramatic, leading to birth defects and uninhabitable areas. Nuclear is only green when you only look at CO2. CO2 is the most pressing issue right now, which is why I support nuclear as a transitional energy source on our way to greener energy, but let's not fool ourselves and pretend it's as clean as wind.
- inkblotuniverse 4y agoIt's cleaner. Wind turbines break down, and chemical waste never decays.