Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

wysimdnwyg

(2,257 posts)
16. And yet you continue to misrepresent - or misunderstand - what I'm saying
Mon Nov 4, 2024, 12:16 PM
Nov 4

My argument is not that nuclear (or solar) is worse than fossil fuels. You and I can agree that continued use of fossil fuels is by far the worst thing we can do. So please stop trying to imply that I’m suggesting for one second that there is ANY equivalence there.

Now, if you can show me (and not by a reference to another thread, especially without a link) how the environmental impact of perovskite solar - or solar as a whole - is worse than nuclear generation, I’d be happy to review. (Be aware: you’re the scientist, I’m in IT, and much of what you understand may be over my head.) Until then, please understand that I believe nuclear is and will continue to be part of the solution, at least over the next few decades.

And come on, saying solar has “done nothing, zero, to address the destruction of the planetary atmosphere” is absurd. Every kilowatt of energy used from solar is less used from fossil fuel sources.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Ummmm...delicious....let'...»Reply #16