• jnod4@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Enrolled in an energy/“climate-focused” masters degree funded by British Petrol. The only downside in nuclear is plants being a sensitive target in warfare.

    • Therms45@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      And earthquakes, and tsunamis, and hurricanes, and floods, and any other unforeseen circumstance which will result in rising level of cancer and lowering life expectancy for generations in the centuries to come. But yes who cares?! Glowy thing go brrrrrrr!

        • Therms45@europe.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 hours ago

          You realise that death isn’t the only bad thing that can happen to you? I’d say crippling you and future generations for life is worse than death.

            • Therms45@europe.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 hours ago

              No it’s not! It’s a minuscule step forward which will achieve no change whatsoever for the average person except an INCREASE in the amount of carcinogenic compounds in the atmosphere!

              The massive step forward would be not needing boiling water and not needing to burn any fuel whatsoever to produce energy. That would be a “massive” step forward, not nuclear.

              And btw, water vapour is a greenhouse gas too.