Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

None of these points seem to address the parent’s point which was that restarting a nuclear plant that is much older than its intended lifespan is not safe.

“No more criticisms without solutions” is not a real argument. Obviously criticisms must be considered. And the magnitude of the risks is obviously important.



My response was directed at this comment:

> Nuclear energy is expensive, dangerous and will only work with massive taxpayer subsidies.

It's unhelpful and doesn't move the discussion forward to unilaterally label something as shite and provide no viable alternative.


It sounds like you are arguing nuclear power is expensive, dangerous, and will only work with massive taxpayer subsidies; but we should ignore all of that because we don’t have a viable alternative. I don’t think we should ignore those statements?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: