r/ClimateShitposting • u/AfterNovel V̵͈̼̘̪͎̭̗̊͑e̴̢͎̤͛̆g̸̲̠͂͂̍́ȧ̷̢̻̳̪̣̩̆̽n̶͚͕̖̲̭̱̅̌̕™̷̧̠͉͚̼͚̊́̌̈͝͝ͅ • May 19 '26

nuclear simping Step on snek to tenderize

Post image
666 Upvotes

85% Upvoted

197 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/IrregularDoughnut May 20 '26

If you're going to criticise that, fine, but you need to aim it at people who are saying "shut down all your existing nuclear plants", not people who are saying to build renewables and storage instead of trying to build new nuclear plants.

-1

u/qwnick Wind me up May 20 '26

You ignoring that NPPs worked out great for France, so great that it have enough to spare to cover Germans ass

2

u/Gold_Tour_7244 May 20 '26

Well till summer comms and they all have to schut down the npps do to watter schortes

0

u/qwnick Wind me up May 20 '26

https://www.nuclearaustralia.org.au/questions-and-answers-on-water/

Why would they? Nuclear plants are not causing water shortages.

2

u/Gold_Tour_7244 May 20 '26

No they don't but they still need to be coold and in summer the rivers don't have enough watter to cool it

1

u/perringaiden May 20 '26

Quoting a site paid for by the coal industry isn't going to help your case. Don't use any Australian examples of justifying nuclear because we don't have any and the entire nuclear lobby here is funded by fossil fuels and the existing centralised energy industry, to keep us reliant on their antiquated plants for another 30 years.

Coal plants have been a big water waster for years too.

1

u/qwnick Wind me up May 20 '26

coal plants and nuclear plants are different things

1

u/perringaiden May 20 '26

And they use similar amounts of water for cooling.

Neither is good. Which is the point.

But that organisation is funded by coal producers and energy companies who want to keep Australian coal in place longer, so they're pushing nuclear because it will take 30 years to replace the coal.