this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2023
166 points (95.6% liked)

Green - An environmentalist community

5307 readers
4 users here now

This is the place to discuss environmentalism, preservation, direct action and anything related to it!


RULES:

1- Remember the human

2- Link posts should come from a reputable source

3- All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith


Related communities:


Unofficial Chat rooms:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

When do we get the next one?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (65 children)

The waste disposal is a solvable issue, that is still less nefarious than fossil fuel emissions. If you set the goal to replace ALL fossil fuel power generation, then nuclear is a necessary component of a renewable energy based grid. Geothermal and hydro are great and necessary, but can't provide a reliable base load for the entire grid. Nuclear plants are complemental to renewables, not competition.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (19 children)

@Claidheamh
Nuclear is also very expensive. Bioenergy is the one I missed. That is far cheaper than nuclear and could be scaled up easily. I'm sure there will be a need for both the existing nuclear and indeed some fossil fuels for a while yet. But I think we should focus on getting our renewable energy resources in place in advance of building any new nuclear plants.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I don't support any continued burning it fossil fuels. That's what every previous generation said and look at the thermometer.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

In that case you should be in favor of nuclear, as it's the only real replacement we have for fossil fuels, no matter what Shell and BP will try to tell us.

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (61 replies)