this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2024
331 points (85.1% liked)

Science Memes

11397 readers
228 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
331
TURKEY POWER (mander.xyz)
submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
96 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] BluesF 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The energy problem we have isn't beyond my lifetime, it's now. There is a finite amount of investment available for new energy projects, and if we pour it into nuclear that means 10+ years of continuing with present usage of fossil fuels. Obviously I know noone is suggesting we do only nuclear, but the point remains that renewables projects can be completed sooner and cheaper. Even if we continue to use nuclear to support the base load and decide to develop some level of capability beyond what exists today, the majority of investment should go to renewables.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

We have there options:

  1. Continue fossils and make earth uninhabitable for a medium (on the scale of humanity) duration of time.

  2. Switch to renevables, even if it means changing our way of living, maybe overproducing less, having less ultra riches etc.

  3. Switch to nuclear, which isn't fast enough to stop the fossil problem but also contaminates earth for a ultra long amount of time and also is way harder to get rid of (we have at least in theory options to get co2 out of the atmosphere even if its not at all practical/usable e ough to help us with our current situation, for nuclear waste there is literally nothing you can to except wait.)

No sane person I met ever argued for 1, but since some time Americans seem to start arguing for 3 instead of 2 with literally no good arguments.