World News

32367 readers

557 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

338

U.S. Pledge To Triple Global Nuclear Energy By 2050 (www.huffpost.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

120 comments fedilink hide all child comments

When I first read the titile, I thought that the US is going to have to build A LOT to triple global production. Then it occured to me that the author means the US is pledging to make deals and agreements which enable other countries to build their own. Sometimes I think the US thinks too much of itself and that's also very much part of American branding.

Where are my renewable bros at? Tell me this is bad.

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

[–] veganpizza69 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Where are my renewable bros at? Tell me this is bad.

It's a waste of resources. Perfect timing for the NuScale drama https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2023/11/15/2781465/0/en/NuScale-Power-Corporation-Sued-By-Block-Leviton-LLP-for-Securities-Law-Violations.html

[–] CheeseNoodle 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'd say its worthwhile if space is a consideration, and better than hydro which is habbitat destroying and more consistently disasterous than nuclear. Before that we have tidal and offshore wind and municiple solar to get through... but after that I'd rather put up nuclear and geothermal than turn large swathes of wilderness into solar or wind farms.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

exactly, we can't spend that much to slow or stop climate change. it's not an option, the money is more valuable.