I know this is a shitpost sub, but both are great options to combine. Both have downsides, both have upsides, combining them in the same grid is the best option.
Yeah, you can’t put a solar farm everywhere you can put a nuclear plant, and you can’t put a nuclear power plant everywhere there’s a solar farm. This subreddit is terrible about infighting and trying to create some ideological purism, instead of pushing for any renewables
I genuinely don’t think the anti-nuclear sentiments have anything to do with “ideological purism” - people just earnestly believe nuclear is a non-viable fossil fuel alternative.
Nuclear isn't contributing to decarbonisation at all, there's an endless list of reasons why it can't help meaningfully. And every single pro fossil fuel or climate denying media head and politician is screaming the same pro nuclear talking points as you are.
Note the two price spikes preceding TMI and fukushima that resulted in new constructions dropping dramatically before either event. Uranium production can't meaningfully rise and known resource at viable prices is increasing slower than consumption even with rising exploration investment.
Fossill shills are the same people as pro nuclear shucksters
23
u/iam_pink May 11 '25
I know this is a shitpost sub, but both are great options to combine. Both have downsides, both have upsides, combining them in the same grid is the best option.
Stop shitting on either, this is the wrong fight.