2165
Young climate activist tells Greenpeace to drop ‘old-fashioned’ anti-nuclear stance
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
2165 points (94.1% liked)
World News
38563 readers
2499 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
When she can tell me a practical, long-term, solution to nuclear waste, demonstrate that a nuclear bomb is not a military target, sure.
We just saw Japan release nuclear waste into the ocean for lack of a solution (to the waste from a fucking nuclear disaster) , don't tell me it's not a problem.
Yes I know coal emits radioactive waste, I'm not a coal advocate.
Here are few things to consider:
Thank you, could not have said it better. Nuclear is the way forward, at least until fusion energy is viable.
Even still, it still needs to be transported, stored in specialized facilities, etc. All that transport and resource usage isn't free and must be considered as part of the cost of nuclear.
Direct fatalities is a poor metric for nuclear safety.
Those are great arguments for not doing those things as well. These are things that massive unsustainable human populations make use of and are not necessary to thriving human populations.
This depends on the type of waste, and how radioactive it is. The overwhelming majority of nuclear waste is low level, and capable of being safely stored in steel/concrete casks. The higher level stuff can be safely stored in exhausted mines.
All power sources are inherently military targets, so you've defined an impossible task.
Additionally, you can design a plant to be a lower risk target in the case of an attack. We've had decades of research put into how to make these plants safe.
https://sgp.fas.org/crs/homesec/RL34331.pdf
https://theconversation.com/how-to-protect-nuclear-plants-from-terrorists-57094
I'm not thrilled with it either, but the waste they are releasing is diluted.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-66610977
The water they are releasing is basically no different than the radioactivity of normal sea water.
I would also emphasize that nuclear reactor =/= nuclear bomb. Power reactors cannot under any circumstances cause a nuclear explosion.
The solution to pollution is dilution! right!?
In the case of radioactive water, yes. Our oceans are huge, and there is no real impact.
This is what humans have been saying about auto exhaust, factory emissions, agricultural emissions etc for a hundred years. It's turned out wrong in every way.
(edit) Now that I think about it, isn't your position basically the same as the right wing position on climate change? That even if it exists humans are too small to actually effect the huge atmosphere so it's not human caused.
"The amount of X that industry is dumping into the Y is insignificant and nothing to be concerned about" is an inherently flawed argument, and all the worse when there are 8 billion people on the planet.
There is a key difference, fossil fuel use inherently ends up leaving pollution in the atmosphere, nuclear power does not do anything of the same.
Nope. It's not even close
That's not even close to what I am saying.
All sea water is radioactive already, and has been since before humans got nukes. And thats because all sea water has tritium at low levels. When we release water that is at the same level as sea water, nothing changes.
It's like adding a red ball or playdoh to a red ball of playdoh. There's not going to be a difference. Fossil fuels on the other hand would be like adding a black ball of playdoh to a red one.
Maybe learn some science before you sound stupid in public? That waste water was cleaner than your drinking water.
lol