▲ 163 ▼ France temporarily shuts down three nuclear reactors over heatwave (www.france24.com) submitted 3 months ago by supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz to c/climate@slrpnk.net 37 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago (6 children) I'm well aware. Both are important, thus my question. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Laser@feddit.org 17 points 3 months ago (5 children) Europe as in the EU member states don't mine uranium, so it's a strategic dependency anyways. If you're not a nuclear power (i.e. France or the UK, though no longer a Union member), nuclear makes no sense permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (4 children) True, but a reliable supply exists with your friends in Canada. Nuclear has to be secondary to wind and solar, but in a fossil fuel free world it still has a place. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Laser@feddit.org 9 points 3 months ago (3 children) "Surely this time relying on partner nations won't get us in trouble" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children) What is the EU if not partners you count on? It's not wise to go it alone. Friends and partners are good to have. Also as I stated, nuclear comes after wind and solar. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Laser@feddit.org 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) My point was relying on Canada for Uranium is like relying on the US for, I don't know, weapons or something, you're only one election away from being cut off a resource permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 1 point 3 months ago* I totally get that. But that is really a fact of life. No country can afford to live on only its own resources. Edit: Canada has always wanted to sell its resources and is not aspiring empire. So one election away isn't accurate. Both major parties will gladly sell. It is vital to us, and makes us just that more reliable a partner. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Laser@feddit.org 17 points 3 months ago (5 children) Europe as in the EU member states don't mine uranium, so it's a strategic dependency anyways. If you're not a nuclear power (i.e. France or the UK, though no longer a Union member), nuclear makes no sense permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (4 children) True, but a reliable supply exists with your friends in Canada. Nuclear has to be secondary to wind and solar, but in a fossil fuel free world it still has a place. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Laser@feddit.org 9 points 3 months ago (3 children) "Surely this time relying on partner nations won't get us in trouble" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children) What is the EU if not partners you count on? It's not wise to go it alone. Friends and partners are good to have. Also as I stated, nuclear comes after wind and solar. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Laser@feddit.org 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) My point was relying on Canada for Uranium is like relying on the US for, I don't know, weapons or something, you're only one election away from being cut off a resource permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 1 point 3 months ago* I totally get that. But that is really a fact of life. No country can afford to live on only its own resources. Edit: Canada has always wanted to sell its resources and is not aspiring empire. So one election away isn't accurate. Both major parties will gladly sell. It is vital to us, and makes us just that more reliable a partner. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (4 children) True, but a reliable supply exists with your friends in Canada. Nuclear has to be secondary to wind and solar, but in a fossil fuel free world it still has a place. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Laser@feddit.org 9 points 3 months ago (3 children) "Surely this time relying on partner nations won't get us in trouble" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children) What is the EU if not partners you count on? It's not wise to go it alone. Friends and partners are good to have. Also as I stated, nuclear comes after wind and solar. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Laser@feddit.org 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) My point was relying on Canada for Uranium is like relying on the US for, I don't know, weapons or something, you're only one election away from being cut off a resource permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 1 point 3 months ago* I totally get that. But that is really a fact of life. No country can afford to live on only its own resources. Edit: Canada has always wanted to sell its resources and is not aspiring empire. So one election away isn't accurate. Both major parties will gladly sell. It is vital to us, and makes us just that more reliable a partner. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Laser@feddit.org 9 points 3 months ago (3 children) "Surely this time relying on partner nations won't get us in trouble" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children) What is the EU if not partners you count on? It's not wise to go it alone. Friends and partners are good to have. Also as I stated, nuclear comes after wind and solar. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Laser@feddit.org 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) My point was relying on Canada for Uranium is like relying on the US for, I don't know, weapons or something, you're only one election away from being cut off a resource permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 1 point 3 months ago* I totally get that. But that is really a fact of life. No country can afford to live on only its own resources. Edit: Canada has always wanted to sell its resources and is not aspiring empire. So one election away isn't accurate. Both major parties will gladly sell. It is vital to us, and makes us just that more reliable a partner. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children) What is the EU if not partners you count on? It's not wise to go it alone. Friends and partners are good to have. Also as I stated, nuclear comes after wind and solar. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Laser@feddit.org 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) My point was relying on Canada for Uranium is like relying on the US for, I don't know, weapons or something, you're only one election away from being cut off a resource permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 1 point 3 months ago* I totally get that. But that is really a fact of life. No country can afford to live on only its own resources. Edit: Canada has always wanted to sell its resources and is not aspiring empire. So one election away isn't accurate. Both major parties will gladly sell. It is vital to us, and makes us just that more reliable a partner. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Laser@feddit.org 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) My point was relying on Canada for Uranium is like relying on the US for, I don't know, weapons or something, you're only one election away from being cut off a resource permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 1 point 3 months ago* I totally get that. But that is really a fact of life. No country can afford to live on only its own resources. Edit: Canada has always wanted to sell its resources and is not aspiring empire. So one election away isn't accurate. Both major parties will gladly sell. It is vital to us, and makes us just that more reliable a partner. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world 1 point 3 months ago* I totally get that. But that is really a fact of life. No country can afford to live on only its own resources. Edit: Canada has always wanted to sell its resources and is not aspiring empire. So one election away isn't accurate. Both major parties will gladly sell. It is vital to us, and makes us just that more reliable a partner. permalink fedilink source parent