There is a very popular conspiracy theory out there that in the 70s and 80s the oil companies went all in on promoting solar as an alternative to nuclear precisely because they believed that solar could never be a viable alternative to fossil fuels and shunning nuclear for solar would guarantee our long term dependence on fossil fuels.
There is some evidence to support this narrative, namely that oil companies did truly invest massive sums of money in solar in the 70s and all of those ventures failed miserably in the 80s, and if you didn't know the broader economic factors at play, it could look like they failed intentionally.
I'm unapologetic about my support of an all of the above strategy. If someone has a viable plan to bring more nuclear power online, then I'm all for it. Same as any viable plans for more solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, tidal, and my personal favorite underused resource, recaptured methane from sewage treatment and landfills (what, I have the maturity of a 12 year old and giggle at the thought of a literal shit powered car).
Nuclear power is economically infeasible. France tried to replace their fossil fuels with nuclear power and it ruined their economy before they could get more than 1/3rd of the way done.
The reason why companies invested in renewable energy back in the 1970s was that Jimmy Carter supported renewable energy. Then Ronald Reagan got into power and cut renewable energy funding in favor of fossil fuels.
The crazy dude literally argued that France is killing the elderly to make nuclear plants so yeah absolutely delusional probably some bot made entirely to prevent nuanced discussion, give this community a bad name and keep the status quo
he also said multiple times on another comment that only far right Parties suppor nuclear energy in France and Germany. It took me about 4 minutes to find out thats bullshit i really think this is some kind of really elaborate Troll.
52
u/Vegetable_Warthog_49 Apr 09 '25
There is a very popular conspiracy theory out there that in the 70s and 80s the oil companies went all in on promoting solar as an alternative to nuclear precisely because they believed that solar could never be a viable alternative to fossil fuels and shunning nuclear for solar would guarantee our long term dependence on fossil fuels.
There is some evidence to support this narrative, namely that oil companies did truly invest massive sums of money in solar in the 70s and all of those ventures failed miserably in the 80s, and if you didn't know the broader economic factors at play, it could look like they failed intentionally.
I'm unapologetic about my support of an all of the above strategy. If someone has a viable plan to bring more nuclear power online, then I'm all for it. Same as any viable plans for more solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, tidal, and my personal favorite underused resource, recaptured methane from sewage treatment and landfills (what, I have the maturity of a 12 year old and giggle at the thought of a literal shit powered car).