you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Yea, better burn the world down instead.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    You know that renewable Energy exists? In the time we would need to replace follils with nuclear we can insted build renewables and Storage capacitys and we would be way cheaper.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I’m mostly commenting on the fact that people are so concerned with the cost of nuclear plants yet they seem to not care about the cost of the damage that rampant fossil fuel production comes with. This has been the shitty argument for long before renewables became viable and nuclear would have been a much better stepping stone. There are also always going to be places where renewable energy won’t work or be enough.

    It’s never going to be a single solution problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Ok, fair enough. I also absolutely agree that we shaould have went for nuclear instead of coal, but now its to late and its faster to replace coal with renewables, than replacing it with nuclear.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    but now its to late and its faster to replace coal with renewables, than replacing it with nuclear.

    Nope, that's bullshit. Nuclear development didn't stop in the 80s and you can't rely on renewables alone 'cos they're not constant. You need a stable supply.

  • source
  • parent