The two sources of energy don’t have to be competition. Those on either side trying to make that happen are just defeating the fight against fossil fuels. They want the squabbling to distract from their dominance.
Nuclear is expensive and produces a shit ton of waste. Green energy is cheap and produces way less waste.
And don’t start on “but green energy can’t produce enough energy” when people who have solar panels are being fucking punished for producing “too much” energy while the local fossil fuel run power station can produce however much it likes.
Nuclear doesn’t produce all that much waste compared to how much energy you get out of it especially with modern reactors. Sure what you get out can be highly radioactive with a half life shorter than a Victorian child miners life expectancy, but we can contain that relatively easily or just drop it onto Utah nothing of worth outside of a couple parks going on there.
There are 74 sites across the USA for those long-term waste. Some are very sensible sites like dry storage sites.those sites are costing taxpayers billions.
Burning coal puts more nuclear waste into the atmosphere than nuclear does. Nuclear causes less deaths than pretty much all power sources, even some green ones.
Until coal and gas have been done away with completely, nuclear is a better option .
Correct. I was just pointing out that a lot of the problems with nuclear are more or less solved. Before anyone brings up Fukashima I’m going to point out that was raw neglegence, the company running the reactor was told multiple times to move the backup generators up hill in case of tsunamis and guess what they didn’t do.
Every last executive for that company needs to be tared, feathered, and ignited.
The two sources of energy don’t have to be competition. Those on either side trying to make that happen are just defeating the fight against fossil fuels. They want the squabbling to distract from their dominance.
Nuclear is expensive and produces a shit ton of waste. Green energy is cheap and produces way less waste.
And don’t start on “but green energy can’t produce enough energy” when people who have solar panels are being fucking punished for producing “too much” energy while the local fossil fuel run power station can produce however much it likes.
Nuclear doesn’t produce all that much waste compared to how much energy you get out of it especially with modern reactors. Sure what you get out can be highly radioactive with a half life shorter than a Victorian child miners life expectancy, but we can contain that relatively easily or just drop it onto Utah nothing of worth outside of a couple parks going on there.
There are 74 sites across the USA for those long-term waste. Some are very sensible sites like dry storage sites.those sites are costing taxpayers billions.
Ok and if that’s the cost of switching to nuclear over fucking coal and oil then it’s a good thing
Renewables and storage can do that too
Burning coal puts more nuclear waste into the atmosphere than nuclear does. Nuclear causes less deaths than pretty much all power sources, even some green ones.
Until coal and gas have been done away with completely, nuclear is a better option .
Renewable also
Correct. I was just pointing out that a lot of the problems with nuclear are more or less solved. Before anyone brings up Fukashima I’m going to point out that was raw neglegence, the company running the reactor was told multiple times to move the backup generators up hill in case of tsunamis and guess what they didn’t do.
Every last executive for that company needs to be tared, feathered, and ignited.
Oh I was answering the wrong post ;-)
Honestly it read like it was a further elaboration on mine so that’s just what I figured it was.