▲ 2206 ▼ Young climate activist tells Greenpeace to drop ‘old-fashioned’ anti-nuclear stance (www.theguardian.com) submitted 2 years ago by sv1sjp@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world 1121 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] umad_cause_ibad@lemm.ee -7 points 2 years ago (2 children) The option proposed is that making a small area of the planet inhabitable or worsening climate change. Sorry but that’s a shitty comparison. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] SocialEngineer56@notdigg.com 5 points 2 years ago No. The original comment said the “worst disaster made a very small she’s of the planet uninhabitable”. Keep in mind this disaster was the result of Soviet incompetence and completely avoidable with standards implemented in the US. They’re saying our “worst case scenario” using nuclear power is better than worst case scenario continuing to use fossil fuels. Likelihood of worse case scenario using nuclear power is also extremely low. Whereas worst case scenario (billions of people dying) for continuing to use fossil fuels is EXTREMELY HIGH. permalink fedilink source parent [–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) Bet you’d feel* differently if you were a resident of one of the island nations that’s going to drown in the next decade or two. That part of the world’s definitely going to be uninhabitable if we continue to do nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] umad_cause_ibad@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago (2 children) So installing a nuclear reactor in my province where we have ample hydro electric power options would save that island? It’s like you are yell at everyone saying nuclear power or die. There are lots of options to clean reliable energy. In some cases nuclear will be the best option but not always. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 2 years ago* I’m not that pro-nuclear. You just made a shitty comparison ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Edit: Also if you think hydro is the solution, again, more uninhabitable land. Dams are their own ecological disaster. permalink fedilink source parent [–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 2 years ago You called me suspicious so here I am fulfilling that expectation. Here’s a fucking great video on why dams, and therefore hydro power, are dangerous and ecologically damaging. The only point I was trying to make is that your argument against nuclear, that it might cause an area of land to become uninhabitable, is flawed. Dams always make an area of land uninhabitable. https://youtu.be/AL57dSIXqBM permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SocialEngineer56@notdigg.com 5 points 2 years ago No. The original comment said the “worst disaster made a very small she’s of the planet uninhabitable”. Keep in mind this disaster was the result of Soviet incompetence and completely avoidable with standards implemented in the US. They’re saying our “worst case scenario” using nuclear power is better than worst case scenario continuing to use fossil fuels. Likelihood of worse case scenario using nuclear power is also extremely low. Whereas worst case scenario (billions of people dying) for continuing to use fossil fuels is EXTREMELY HIGH. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) Bet you’d feel* differently if you were a resident of one of the island nations that’s going to drown in the next decade or two. That part of the world’s definitely going to be uninhabitable if we continue to do nothing. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] umad_cause_ibad@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago (2 children) So installing a nuclear reactor in my province where we have ample hydro electric power options would save that island? It’s like you are yell at everyone saying nuclear power or die. There are lots of options to clean reliable energy. In some cases nuclear will be the best option but not always. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 2 years ago* I’m not that pro-nuclear. You just made a shitty comparison ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Edit: Also if you think hydro is the solution, again, more uninhabitable land. Dams are their own ecological disaster. permalink fedilink source parent [–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 2 years ago You called me suspicious so here I am fulfilling that expectation. Here’s a fucking great video on why dams, and therefore hydro power, are dangerous and ecologically damaging. The only point I was trying to make is that your argument against nuclear, that it might cause an area of land to become uninhabitable, is flawed. Dams always make an area of land uninhabitable. https://youtu.be/AL57dSIXqBM permalink fedilink source parent
[–] umad_cause_ibad@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago (2 children) So installing a nuclear reactor in my province where we have ample hydro electric power options would save that island? It’s like you are yell at everyone saying nuclear power or die. There are lots of options to clean reliable energy. In some cases nuclear will be the best option but not always. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 2 years ago* I’m not that pro-nuclear. You just made a shitty comparison ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Edit: Also if you think hydro is the solution, again, more uninhabitable land. Dams are their own ecological disaster. permalink fedilink source parent [–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 2 years ago You called me suspicious so here I am fulfilling that expectation. Here’s a fucking great video on why dams, and therefore hydro power, are dangerous and ecologically damaging. The only point I was trying to make is that your argument against nuclear, that it might cause an area of land to become uninhabitable, is flawed. Dams always make an area of land uninhabitable. https://youtu.be/AL57dSIXqBM permalink fedilink source parent
[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 2 years ago* I’m not that pro-nuclear. You just made a shitty comparison ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Edit: Also if you think hydro is the solution, again, more uninhabitable land. Dams are their own ecological disaster. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 2 years ago You called me suspicious so here I am fulfilling that expectation. Here’s a fucking great video on why dams, and therefore hydro power, are dangerous and ecologically damaging. The only point I was trying to make is that your argument against nuclear, that it might cause an area of land to become uninhabitable, is flawed. Dams always make an area of land uninhabitable. https://youtu.be/AL57dSIXqBM permalink fedilink source parent