siririus

joined 11 months ago
[โ€“] siririus@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

He changed the topic from nuclear to coal.

[โ€“] siririus@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That's like arguing why take chemo if it only makes you sicker in the short run. ๐Ÿค”

[โ€“] siririus@lemmy.world -3 points 10 months ago (5 children)

And because they shut down their nuclear plants, they had to start burning coal again...

Unrelated and a whataboutism.

[โ€“] siririus@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (9 children)

Nuclear has been at that supply level since the 1970s. Other parts of the world have much higher renewable mixes in their energy inputs. For example, Germany:

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/germany-likely-pass-50-mark-renewable-power-this-year-minister-2023-09-18/

Nuclear is not necessary to meet climate change targets. In fact, it's so damned expensive to deploy and maintain, it will harm meeting those targets.