The older activists with decades of literal Rockefeller money in their pockets, you mean?
Claidheamh
joined 2 years ago
Solar is yellowish orange, wind is gray, hydro is blue. Nuclear is the only green one.
The classic shortsighted point of view that has put us in the current situation in the first place.
Ok, so from your point of view 40% fossil fuels is still doing fine? I interpreted your original comment to mean they were doing 100% or close to it in renewables. Then I misunderstood.
This doesn't seem to agree with that statement.
What it really should be is nuclear plus renewables plus a ton of batteries (or other storage options) vs fossil fuels.
I'm sorry but burning methane isn't doing just fine.
Do you know how much nuclear waste has been produced in the whole world for the entire history of nuclear energy production?
Around 500 000 tonnes.
That's 0.001% of the waste thrown into the atmosphere by fossil fuels EVERY YEAR.
The same people who run the oil companies also run nuclear plants
What? You keep saying this in this thread, where the hell are you getting it from?
What are you talking about? Nuclear has been the target of a massive misinformation campaign from the fossil fuel corporations for decades. Looks like you've fallen for the FUD. People have been formatted by literally every form of media to think of nuclear as something dirty, dumping green glowing waste into the environment, and making fish grow extra heads.
Countries like Germany have been closing perfectly fine NPPs because of FUD funded by their huge fossil fuel lobby. 80% of our energy is from fossils, and they have apparently successfully convinced people that we shouldn't attack that number with every tool at our disposal. Meanwhile, we're collectively spending literally trillions of dollars on fossil fuel subsidies every year. Is that what pushing nuclear hard looks like?
That's the exact argument people have been making for 60 years, and look where we are now. Around 80% of the world's energy is still from fossil fuels. Do you want to continue making the same mistakes as the previous generations?
Sure, but it's still GHG emissions, "only when needed" or not. The whole point we're making is those gas generators should have been nuclear generators in the first place.
And we continue building gas and coal power plants. Why? Build nuclear plants instead.