• pulsey@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    You can’t just replace coal and oil by nuclear power. it takes decades to build a new plant and is very expensive. Money that is better spend in investing in wind and solar.

    • UndercoverUlrikHD@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      You can’t just replace coal and oil by nuclear power. it takes decades to build a new plant and is very expensive.

      That’s been said for over a decade at this point. We could have had plenty of nuclear power plants and maintained/developed expertise in the area if clean energy was a goal that was taken seriously by Europe. Both solar and wind are innately inefficient in terms of W/m^2, and wind has the additional problem of noise pollution and environmental impact.

    • Hansae@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Nuclear is needed for stable base load, in significant quantity as well. And the argument of they take years doesn’t hold water, in fact its more the reason to start now.

    • atro_city@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      No-one is saying “stop building solar and wind”. Nuclear is for transitioning and should’ve been built 10-20 years ago, but now is also a good time.