• ahornsirup
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    Those reactors were ancient and, even without the nuclear power phaseout, they would’ve needed to be replaced. And contrary to popular belief, they were replaced with renewables, not fossil fuels. The choice was build wind turbines and solar panels and upgrade the grid or spend the same amount of money on building nuclear reactors that still rely on imported fuel that needs to be mined in some third world country in an extremely environmentally destructive way and that, regardless of design, produce nuclear waste.

    • Eheran@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      And did they get replaced? No. Because bad nuclear, they still think like that. It is the only tech we have with a chance to actually reduce CO2 emissions as much as WE need to in the near future.

      You say they were replaced by renewables… Sure. But then they did not replace fossiles, which is exactly the issue. Also, they provide base load, only hydro and geothermal can do that, and they did not suddenly get another few GW installed. We are still using as much fossiles as we did 20+ years ago, it is fucking crazy. Have a look at the chart (the absolute values are not better looking)

      • Smoogs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        A lot of this is the problem with companies still selling combustible stuff as they have an overflow based on this stupid decision to overproduce. and act like this bus is too big to turn around to just use something else.

        Don’t you see the stock to sell for potential $ $$$ $ is the real issue on every capitalists mind.

        Won’t you think of the capitalist?? So selfish!

        /s <just in case

        • Eheran@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          I do not think that it has sometime to do with capitalism. Everyone is using fossiles, because they are cheap and abundant. Every form of government etc. used them if they had access to them.

          The same way everyone drives cars, even tho accidents are the 3rd highest cause of death. They do that because it is convenient etc.

    • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Those reactors were ancient and, even without the nuclear power phaseout, they would’ve needed to be replaced.

      Would the timeline have been the same?

      The choice was build wind turbines and solar panels and upgrade the grid or spend the same amount of money on building nuclear reactors that still rely on imported fuel that needs to be mined in some third world country in an extremely environmentally destructive way

      Solar panels at least use a lot of imported materials from what I’ve read. So similar issues there. Not sure which ends up as the lesser evil for the third world.