
Serious about emissions? It’s time to embrace nuclear (2013) - ericdanielski
https://theconversation.com/serious-about-emissions-its-time-to-embrace-nuclear-12964
======
ailideex
[https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/climate-change-
acti...](https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/climate-change-activists-
protest-against-high-speed-uk-train-line-1.4051108)

> Climate change activists protest against high-speed UK train line

I'm not convinced these people care about what they say they care about.

------
ZeroGravitas
In a world full of climate change denial, is it really a good look to
continually accuse people who acknowledge the reality of climate change of not
really believing in it if they don't adopt specific proposal X that you like?

There must be a million ways to express the idea that nuclear power has a part
to play in solving climate change without attacking people as liars and
hypocrites.

~~~
mikevp
The anti-nuclear self-proclaimed environmentalists simply do not seem to
understand the concept of "Base Load." They believe, or pretend to believe,
that industrial civilization can be powered by "sunny days when the wind is
blowing" energy, and doesn't need 24x7 365 days a year energy.

I call this arithmetic denialism.

If you don't want to be an arithmetic denier, show me the energy source that
can provide 24x7 energy all 356 days a year in sufficient quantity to power
industrial/technological civilization. I see a startling lack of _any_ energy
source that passes muster with the anti-nuke sort of "environmentalist."

Call that what you like...

