<![CDATA[Also, can we stop having the conversation about how nuclear is (part of) the pivot from fossil?]]>RE: https://mastodon.social/@Climatehistories/117093018572587050

Also, can we stop having the conversation about how nuclear is (part of) the pivot from fossil? Because it clearly isn't.

Even if we didn't have record heat waves & water shortages, the main draw of *actually* sustainable energy sources like wind, solar etc. is that they don't make the world worse as they're running, because they don't require things like fuel or tons of cooling water, or produce dangerous pollutants.

Should be a no-brainer but here we are...

]]>https://forum.fedi.dk/topic/ca4e211f-28ce-4885-8579-1ad3a68aed25/also-can-we-stop-having-the-conversation-about-how-nuclear-is-part-of-the-pivot-from-fossilRSS for NodeFri, 14 Aug 2026 18:06:20 GMTFri, 14 Aug 2026 09:04:35 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Also, can we stop having the conversation about how nuclear is (part of) the pivot from fossil? on Fri, 14 Aug 2026 14:50:00 GMT]]>@jpaskaruk That would be true if building a (safe!) nuclear plant was fast, cheap & easy - it most definitely is none of those things. Replacing fossil with solar, wind etc. is far cheaper & faster, even accounting for the infrastructure; remember, fossil infrastructure isn't free either, even though a lot of it already exists.

So no, absolutely fucking not, it's an insane & stupid suggestion. Sorry, I'm done mincing words on this. Do better.

]]>https://forum.fedi.dk/post/https://helvede.net/users/jwcph/statuses/117094416426596253https://forum.fedi.dk/post/https://helvede.net/users/jwcph/statuses/117094416426596253Fri, 14 Aug 2026 14:50:00 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Also, can we stop having the conversation about how nuclear is (part of) the pivot from fossil? on Fri, 14 Aug 2026 12:46:25 GMT]]>@jwcph My take on nukes is, they probably should not have gone down that road on any level in the first place, because when they did, they committed thousands of years of subsequent generations to the maintenance of nuclear waste sites. We should curse their names in perpetuity.

That said, they did that, and now we are doing that (maintaining and babysitting nuclear waste, for the rest of our lives and for many of our descendants' lives). That overhead will be paid, or we will have places in the world that murder people for reasons that nobody understands, except it has something to do with ancestors who meddled in the affairs of gods, and now they punish anyone who approaches the fruit of that knowledge. Regardless of what happens, the waste must be understood, and taken care of, like Those Who Must Be Kept, if you were ever an Anne Rice fan. It will sit there and ignore us, and we must pay constant attention to it. Curse their names, who cursed us thus.

But, since we are doing that, it actually behooves us to replace fossil use in Utility power installations, immediately, with as much of any non-emitting power we can deploy, and nuclear is a large non-emitting and safe if done right source, for this particular moment. Yes, the curse, but the curse cannot be lifted, unless we are going to rocket it into the sun, maybe, which, if one of those rockets happens to explode on the pad...

We need to stop with the fossils, today. People won't stop consuming power by choice. Let the curse give us some tiny bit of good.

]]>https://forum.fedi.dk/post/https://growers.social/users/jpaskaruk/statuses/117093930472869244https://forum.fedi.dk/post/https://growers.social/users/jpaskaruk/statuses/117093930472869244Fri, 14 Aug 2026 12:46:25 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Also, can we stop having the conversation about how nuclear is (part of) the pivot from fossil? on Fri, 14 Aug 2026 11:52:12 GMT]]>@jwcph @Climatehistories
Also, the argument that today’s nuclear power tech is safe ignores how greed and capitalism destroys everything and inevitably you have operational and safety decisions made by people more focused on the financial bottom line, with predictable results.

FPL Wants to Store Radioactive Waste Under Our Drinking Water Supply
https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/fpl-wants-to-store-radioactive-waste-under-our-drinking-water-supply-8971822/

Environmental Groups Sue FPL Over Turkey Point Pollution in Biscayne Bay
https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/environmental-groups-sue-fpl-over-turkey-point-pollution-in-biscayne-bay-8597017/

]]>https://forum.fedi.dk/post/https://mastodon.social/users/freediverx/statuses/117093717282033349https://forum.fedi.dk/post/https://mastodon.social/users/freediverx/statuses/117093717282033349Fri, 14 Aug 2026 11:52:12 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Also, can we stop having the conversation about how nuclear is (part of) the pivot from fossil? on Fri, 14 Aug 2026 09:14:39 GMT]]>@jwcph that's not as simple as it seems...They also produce waste because they have to be build and replaced after some years of usage, and they allways end on landfills because we still don't have a decent way to recicle. Nuclear on the other hand produces a lot of energy by comparision. But,
yeah they need water to function, it's not a thing that can be build on any place for several reasons, and that's the great advantage on solar and wind, the problem with those two is how they're being handled, at least here in my country we have hunts to wild animals and entire forests cut down to build big solar farms.

]]>https://forum.fedi.dk/post/https://ciberlandia.pt/users/seyon/statuses/117093097781122618https://forum.fedi.dk/post/https://ciberlandia.pt/users/seyon/statuses/117093097781122618Fri, 14 Aug 2026 09:14:39 GMT