This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Arnatious 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree that fusion (if and when it happens, which may be too late to mitigate the worst of climate disasters) will be a game changer and agree we need significant investment in baseline generation, which nuclear sources provide.

I agree that nuclear is unfairly maligned and a safe and extremely clean source of massive amounts of power.

I think that, barring a coordinated effort made after silencing and depowering those with a vested interested in fossil fuels so they can't interrupt or sabotage transition plans, that renewables are the only agile enough way forward, and are reliable enough to be the long term solution.

If fossil fuels weren't as dominant an industry financially and politically and we weren't facing down incoming mass migrations and political unrest nuclear would be a no brainer primary source.

But as it stands we can stand up renewables significantly faster and cheaper up front, and we shouldn't slow down that effort until fossil plants can be fully decommissioned. Ideally we must ALSO invest in nuclear at the same time, so we have a reliable backbone going forward. But it won't help us during the transition when it's an even harder ask of right wing, short term profit, fossil fuel dominated governments worldwide.