282
Windmill (europe.pub)
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by to c/pics@lemmy.world
32 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

sauce

IT MOVES

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 13 points 4 months ago (11 children)

The two sources of energy don't have to be competition. Those on either side trying to make that happen are just defeating the fight against fossil fuels. They want the squabbling to distract from their dominance.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (10 children)

    Nuclear is expensive and produces a shit ton of waste. Green energy is cheap and produces way less waste.

    And don't start on "but green energy can't produce enough energy" when people who have solar panels are being fucking punished for producing "too much" energy while the local fossil fuel run power station can produce however much it likes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (9 children)

    Nuclear doesn't produce all that much waste compared to how much energy you get out of it especially with modern reactors. Sure what you get out can be highly radioactive with a half life shorter than a Victorian child miners life expectancy, but we can contain that relatively easily or just drop it onto Utah nothing of worth outside of a couple parks going on there.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Burning coal puts more nuclear waste into the atmosphere than nuclear does. Nuclear causes less deaths than pretty much all power sources, even some green ones.

    Until coal and gas have been done away with completely, nuclear is a better option .

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Correct. I was just pointing out that a lot of the problems with nuclear are more or less solved. Before anyone brings up Fukashima I'm going to point out that was raw neglegence, the company running the reactor was told multiple times to move the backup generators up hill in case of tsunamis and guess what they didn't do.

    Every last executive for that company needs to be tared, feathered, and ignited.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)

    There are 74 sites across the USA for those long-term waste. Some are very sensible sites like dry storage sites.those sites are costing taxpayers billions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    Given how ineffective the US economy is that may as well be a completely meaningless statement. I know damned well there are contracts out there that cost billions but the actual expense is only in the millions wages and whatnot included because the company is being bribed and bribing politicians in a corruption circle jerk.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent