• cooopsspace@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Yeah, principles.

      The principles that it won’t be profitable for 50+ years if at all.

      And it will mean we are stuck with fossil fuels for just as long.

      So I’m all for doing anything to survive, preferably sometime in the last 50 years.

      • atro_city@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        The principles that it won’t be profitable for 50+ years if at all.

        Sure, and your source for that is a green politician or an anti-nuclear thinktank?

        So I’m all for doing anything to survive, preferably sometime in the last 50 years.

        “Anything” for greens somehow doesn’t include nuclear for greens 🤷‍♂

        • cooopsspace@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Because the money is better spent elsewhere.

          Yet if we plan for nuclear it’ll be like “oh no, we’ve had project delays and cost blowouts” like they do every time and we will just burn fossil fuels the whole time and die anyway.

          Also the anti nuclear green think tanks are called educated people. And all you’d need to do is look at the European failures and shut downs to know the costs don’t add up.

          • atro_city@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Also the anti nuclear green think tanks are called educated people.

            LMAO. Your brain must be so much bigger than that of physicists who are proponents of nuclear energy. Mr “disagreement with my opinion means you’re wrong”.

            Very convincing argumentation

  • Sniatch@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    People who want nuclear plants should also vote for having a nuclear waste storage in your area if that is possible. In germany we still dont have a solution for the waste we already have and the states who want Nuclear Plants are already said no to havin a storage in their state. You cant make this shit up

    • DraughtGlobe@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The waste doesn’t pose any danger as long as it’s stored securely and doesn’t cost that much space. The only downside of the waste is that it needs to be stored forever, but that’s a very, very, small price to pay for not destroying the planet…

      • Sniatch@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        But its also possible without nuclear waste. You are just pushing the problems with the waste to the future generations.

          • Sniatch@lemmy.world
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Agreed, the future generations already have enough problems. Thats why we should invest into stuff that brings solutions and does not create problems.

                • atro_city@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Money a problem? We have individuals with more money than entire cities and companies with more money than entire nations. Money is not the problem.