U.S. Seeks to Boost Nuclear Power After Decades of Inertia | Measures moving through Congress to encourage new reactors are receiving broad bipartisan support (www.nytimes.com)

submitted 8 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/climate@slrpnk.net

36 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Churbleyimyam@lemm.ee 6 points 8 months ago

The only thing nuclear has going for it at the moment is jobs for the boys. Have a look at Hinkley C in the UK. It's certainly not for cheap or clean energy.

[-] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 11 points 8 months ago

It's not carbon. That's the biggest thing right now; first and foremost, we need to stop carbon emissions. Nuclear is one pathway there, and there's no reason it can't be complimentary to renewables.

[-] derGottesknecht@feddit.de 1 points 8 months ago

Nuclear is one pathway there, and there's no reason it can't be complimentary to renewables.

The reason is limited resources. Whatever we invest into nuclear can't be invested in renewables.

load more comments (2 replies)

this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2024

83 points (92.8% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

5240 readers

359 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

silence7@slrpnk.net