Nuclear capacity is expected to rise by 14% by 2030 and surge by 76% to 686 GWe by 2040, the report said

This is only good news if it displaces thermal coal and gas generating stations.

  • bouh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    A lot of lies of wrong stuff here. The environment for example is much more damaged by renewables, because you need truckloads of space to build the wind or solar farm. China demonstrate how hydro can be damaging too. And it usually ignores the need for energy storage. Both solar and batteries need high quantities of minerals, so that’s not better than anything else here. Nuclear is arguably a lot better because of the energy density of the mined material.

    Ecologists these days seem like a cult that would rather see the world burn in coal and oil than to see even one nuclear power plant built. And this based on ignorance, fear and lies. It’s sad.

    • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      A lot of lies of wrong stuff here

      You’re certainly doing your part. Example:

      The environment for example is much more damaged by renewables, because you need truckloads of space to build the wind or solar farm

      Utilizing available space for renewables is hardly damage, is it? The rest of your post isn’t much better.

      • bouh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Available space is free to build? That’s the least ecologist sentence I read in an ecology or energy discussion. Next you’ll tell me green fuel is renewable and green won’t you?