• Claidheamh@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Ah yes, much better to keep building new coal or gas plants instead. “Fuck the planet, we’re trying to save a dime.”

    • Lotec4@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Good strawman where did I say build coal or gas instead? How are you saving the planet when 1 reactor takes 20 years?

      • Claidheamh@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because that’s what’s happening. Countries are building and reopening fossil fuel plants.

        In 20 years that reactor can make up for thousands of tons a year of CO2. That’s the same argument people have been using for 60 years, and here we are now. That it takes time is no excuse not to start.

        • Lotec4@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Which country? Country’s are investing in renewables you know the energy source that’s cheaper and quicker to deploy than nuclear.

          Nuclear is bad for your grid it’s not flexible. Look at Germany since they stopped using nuclear they where able to use way more solar and wind which previously had to be turned off because nuclear is not flexible.