• PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Two things can be true.

    Nuclear energy can be prohibitively expensive and impractical and have a massive storage problem. And fossil energy can still be even worse with externalities.

    My 2 cents:

    For the case of Germany, yeah it would be batshit crazy to build new nuclear reactors right now. Completely irrational. But turning off the existing ones prematurely was a grandiose idiot move and here we are still mining brown coal. People hold up the “but the nuclear plants that got shut down were replaced with renewables, not coal”. Yeah, well those renewables were supposed to replace the coal.

    • chgxvjh [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      The German situation is (as usually) especially frustrating since it comes down to the right-wingers cashing on a moment of high uncertainty for a bit of popular support and they have since then both sabotaged renewable energy and blamed the nuclear exit on other parties.

    • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      FFS, no one ever argues that we should replace nuclear energy with fossils, even the genuine fossil fuel lobbyist politicians don’t argue it like that. Why even bring it up?

    • Zerush@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 hours ago

      It’s undestandable to use existing Reaktors some years more, because closing them, as explained, is an even bigger mess with inacceptable costs. The consquences of an Hype promoted by Lobbies, without any thoughts and planning about, like selling expensive cars without brakes.