Growth in german wind capacity is slowing. Soo… then the plan is to keep on with lignite and gas? Am I missing something?

Installed Wind Capacty - Germany

German Wind Capacity

  • lntl@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Lol, what am I wrong about? Nuclear is a a carbon free techonolgy that we have that can prodce the energy we need? Germany dumped nuclear to go full renewable and it flopped? France exports a ton energy to Europe? What did I say that was wrong?

    I think your brain is full of ideas that came from somewhere else.

    • Blake [he/him]@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Watch this, I can make you ragequit this entire argument with this one comment with like a 90% confidence rate:

      Prove either of these two statements as false:

      1. The total cost per kWh of nuclear electricity is more expensive than common renewable sources of electricity.

      2. The total amount of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions for nuclear is greater than the carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of common renewable sources of electricity.

      Either that or you can loftily declare yourself above this argument, state that I am somehow moving the goalposts, say that “there’s no point, I’ll never change your mind” or just somehow express some amount of increduiity at my absolutely abhorrent behaviour by asking you such a straightforward question? You may also choose “that’s not the question I want to talk about, we should answer MY questions instead!”

      But go ahead and prove me wrong, I’ll be waiting!

      • lntl@lemmy.mlOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nice. Topic change.

        For real though, you’ve got a lot of energy on this. That’s great. Use it to go after fossil fuels, they’re the ones damaging the climate. Costs are indeed a concern with expanding nuclear but money’s not a problem. Emissions are. If we need more we’ll just print more like we always do.

        • Blake [he/him]@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ah yeah, that’s the stuff, right there. It’s like fucking heroin right into my veins. I ask you directly to contradict the entire underlying basis for my entire original argument and you declare that it’s a “topic change”. I don’t know why you love defending the nuclear industry so much, but man, the entertainment value alone, it’s great stuff.

          Use it to go after fossil fuels, they’re the ones damaging the climate

          How about you take that little hit to your ego, admit that you were wrong, and start being right? We’ve all been there man, I used to be a big supporter of nuclear energy too, you can join me in recovery and we can fight against investments in both fossil fuels AND nuclear AT THE SAME TIME. It’s almost unbelievable I know but we’re actually capable of more advanced thought than “the mineral fuel enemy of my fossil fuel enemy is my friend”. Every million dollars spent on nuclear would have been better spent as half a million on renewables and then burying the other half a million in a hole in the ground. Obviously spending the whole million on renewables would be good as well but I know that it’s just not the same generating power without having some big hole in the ground being dug as part of that process so I’m willing to come to a compromise.

          • lntl@lemmy.mlOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            I won’t fight against anything that helps the climate, even if it’s expensive. It’s unfortunate that anyone would. Do you really think when our grandchildren inherit the land, they’ll be proud that their ancestors saved money when caring for the atmosphere?

            This isn’t about being right or wrong, or arguing about stupid things with a loon from the internet. It’s about the atmosphere, don’t forget that.

            • Blake [he/him]@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Again, compared to nuclear, renewables are:

              • Cheaper
              • Lower emissions
              • Faster to provision
              • Less environmentally damaging
              • Not reliant on continuous consumption of fuel
              • Decentralised
              • Much, much safer
              • Much easier to maintain
              • More reliable
              • Much more responsive to changes in energy demands

              Name a single good fucking thing nuclear does better than renewables.

              • lntl@lemmy.mlOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                omg who are you even talking to? It seems like your copy-pasting responses without reading who you’re talking to. You’re coming off a little looney which is unfortunate because it makes what your talking about sound looney too.

                • Blake [he/him]@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  “I can’t argue with your logic so I’ll just call you crazy instead”, that’s an absolute classic, good choice

                  I didn’t respond to the wrong person, you’re just mad that you’re losing an argument because your position is wrong.

      • escapesamsara@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The total cost per kWh of nuclear electricity is more expensive than common renewable sources of electricity.

        Subsidize nuclear as much as renewables and the price equalizes.

        The total amount of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions for nuclear is greater than the carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of common renewable sources of electricity.

        This is incorrect, objectively.