3 ms·
Dude. Nuclear takes decades to build, and that’s IF you can even build it. There’s zero appetite for it in the US or even formerly nuclear happy Europe. We’re l
by jonathankoren 3y ago
Dude. Nuclear takes decades to build, and that’s IF you can even build it. There’s zero appetite for it in the US or even formerly nuclear happy Europe. We’re literally decommissioning more reactors than we build.
Carbon capture doesn’t work. Even if you did manage to capture it from a coal plant, that’s not enough. You have to suck it from the air, and a scalable technology doesn’t exist, and even if it did, we’d need massive amounts of power to do it, because you’re literally up against the second law of thermodynamics.
And even if you did have all that stuff today, you’d have to deploy it faster than exponential growth!
I’m aorry, but you can’t just yell, “SCIENCE!” and expect it work. It ain’t magic, and the clock has expired. If we listened 50 years ago, and started then, yeah, maybe we’d be in a fighting chance. It’s sure as hell like we didn’t know that check was coming due. Now acting like we can just reverse a century and a half of exponential growth in a weekend is naïve at best, and “thoughts and prayers” level of “fuck you” at worst.
- fullspectrumdev 3y agoBetter to do something (build nuclear) than do nothing (cry on twitter).
- jonathankoren 3y agoYou should do something that actually has a chance to work, rather than feel good about doing something that that doesn’t. When your house is on fire, you don’t start shopping for sprinklers saying, “Good news everyone! The sprinkler system will be installed in three weeks!”, instead of calling the fire department