3 ms·

Why did we have to polarize nuclear and renewables??? Why can't we just aggressively build out and develop both and leave it at that? There is money and resourc

Why did we have to polarize nuclear and renewables??? Why can't we just aggressively build out and develop both and leave it at that? There is money and resources enough to accomplish both, but as a society we just choose to allocate our time and efforts on stupid bullshit. If people are serious about fighting climate change (which I don't think very many peole are) then we need to Manhatten project the solution. A 'war' needs to be declared and some drastic lifestyle changes need to be made by most of the world population. Everyone talks about nuclear and renewables as if it can only be one or the other. I don't ubderstand this sentiment on HackerNews.

threatripper 4y ago
I think that HN is strong in software development areas but those people usually don't have a solid understanding of engineering topics. Using slightly different assumptions, data and mental models you can come to totally different conclusions. Then these energy topics have been heavily polarized by different interest groups for many decades and sophisticated falsehoods are being promoted. I think it is much easier to start with a conclusion and then to build an argument by selecting data than to go the other way of trying to understand all the different alternatives and their impacts. None of the energy sources is ideal in all the ways you can look at it, none of them is a clear winner over all the others (even though it may seem so if you have a simplified understanding). We need to cut through the BS and invest in at least one of the viable solutions. I even think that we can invest enough in all of the viable solutions and then some. The money we are spending on nuclear fusion is still peanuts compared to the whole picture. The "Manhattan project" style approach will happen once our platform is really burning but that may be many years into the future. I'm hopeful that solar and wind out-compete fossil fuel economically and gain enough traction that way.
LatteLazy 4y ago
There isn't enough money to replace the current system with fission, it's simply too expensive.
lm28469 4y ago
Ask that to ecologists, pro nuclear people don't care if renewable are used in combination with nuclear, but pro renewable are very adamant about the fact nuclear is bad and shouldn't be used at all Take germany, they prefer to guzzle on russian gas or choke on coal fumes rather than admit they fucked up. They've been lobbying against nuclear for years and now they blame france for their electricity issues: https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-set-to-extend-nuclear-power-due-to-much-worse-energy-situation-in-france/ https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-set-to-extend-nuclea...

threatripper 4y ago

I think that HN is strong in software development areas but those people usually don't have a solid understanding of engineering topics. Using slightly different assumptions, data and mental models you can come to totally different conclusions. Then these energy topics have been heavily polarized by different interest groups for many decades and sophisticated falsehoods are being promoted. I think it is much easier to start with a conclusion and then to build an argument by selecting data than to go the other way of trying to understand all the different alternatives and their impacts. None of the energy sources is ideal in all the ways you can look at it, none of them is a clear winner over all the others (even though it may seem so if you have a simplified understanding). We need to cut through the BS and invest in at least one of the viable solutions. I even think that we can invest enough in all of the viable solutions and then some. The money we are spending on nuclear fusion is still peanuts compared to the whole picture. The "Manhattan project" style approach will happen once our platform is really burning but that may be many years into the future. I'm hopeful that solar and wind out-compete fossil fuel economically and gain enough traction that way.

LatteLazy 4y ago

There isn't enough money to replace the current system with fission, it's simply too expensive.

lm28469 4y ago

Ask that to ecologists, pro nuclear people don't care if renewable are used in combination with nuclear, but pro renewable are very adamant about the fact nuclear is bad and shouldn't be used at all Take germany, they prefer to guzzle on russian gas or choke on coal fumes rather than admit they fucked up. They've been lobbying against nuclear for years and now they blame france for their electricity issues: https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-set-to-extend-nuclear-power-due-to-much-worse-energy-situation-in-france/ https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-set-to-extend-nuclea...