Originally Posted by
HCZ_Reborn
Except there’s absolutely no connection between the two things apart from in the minds of Guardian journalists and readers. Relying on burning hydrocarbons and actually finally stop being recalcitrant about using Nuclear power are two different things. The people who pin their flag to the mast of alternative only are either ignorant of the fact that it’s only remotely feasible about if we massively decrease our energy demands or they actually want that to be the case and think that because they are already affluent, the hardship will be borne by others. Same as the very privileged kids who demand we immediately cease with imports of new oil and gas….never mind how that would fuck the economy and by far have the most devastating impact on the worse off.
I’m not even against alternative energy, wind, solar, tidal….but anyone who has any grounding in energy/electricity industry can tell you that these are great auxiliary energy but shouldn’t be putting all our eggs in one basket.
Nuclear the main problem is (from a rational stand point and not the scaremongering) is you still have the same energy efficiency issues that you do with fossil fuels, that and we should have been investing in new power plants as well as putting more money into the fusion project long ago before now
Reply With Quote