this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
221 points (100.0% liked)

> Greentext

77 readers
10 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] selokichtli@lemmy.ml 3 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

It's weird. In general, in the greentext community I just reply something stupid and move on. You guys are commenting what seems serious, at the same time there are a lot of people commenting about how we should have gone nuclear, etc. Now, I don't know if you're being serious or you are trolling as I would with a less apocalyptic topic.

There, feels like I made it.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 6 points 17 hours ago

Nuclear isn't apocalyptic, if that's what you're saying. It's caused far less harm than almost every other energy source (the only exception is large scale photovoltaic), including nuclear disasters, which we've learned a lot on how to prevent so will only become less common. They're already extraordinarily uncommon. Storage is also a solved problem and just needs implemented, and is pretty minor as is.

The apocalyptic option is to let dirty energy win the battle. They've been pumping tons of money into anti-nuclear movements to convince people it's dangerous. It isn't though. That's just what traditional energy companies want you to believe to protect their share of the market.

[–] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net 5 points 20 hours ago

We should have gone nuclear, at least for the short term.