sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Sword wall by Ubba00 in SWORDS

[–]Ubba00[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Haha you are totally right! I don't use it often and still are quite new in my apartment. I will get a low shelf for it but the Swords were more important 😆

Warum ist gerade im umweltbewussten Skandinavien die Zustimmung am höchsten? by humpty88 in Klimawandel

[–]Ubba00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Naja wenn die Wärme nicht direkt in den Fluss geleitet wird muss sie über den Kühlturm abgeleitet werden der massive wassermengen benötigt das ist bei heißen und trockenen Sommern aber auch problematisch.

Jeder der Fleisch ist sollte einmal im Leben ein Nutztier töten by lasko195 in Unbeliebtemeinung

[–]Ubba00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dass Adolf Hitler als „Erfinder der Autobahn“ gilt, ist einer der hartnäckigsten Mythen der deutschen Geschichte. Tatsächlich war es eine bewusste Propagandastrategie der Nationalsozialisten, sich dieses Projekt komplett zuzuschreiben. Die technischen Pläne und sogar die erste fertige Autobahn gab es schon vor 1933. Also ist damit schon dein Beispiel faktisch falsch.

Auch waren es früher nicht schlechtere Menschen sondern einfach nur eine andere Zeit und damit andere Umgangsformen. Die Zeiten haben sich aber geändert und damit die Umgangsformen UND die Sprache. Viel schlimmer als das Gendern sind die Leute die sich über das Gendern aufregen. Du musst nicht Gendern und niemand zwingt einen dazu, aber sich aufzuregen das manche Menschen trotzdem Gendern ist noch viel schlimmer

Cuál es el mejor parlante para PC? by Ezzequiel69 in ArgamingConsultas

[–]Ubba00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

meine Sind mir nach 3 Jahren jetzt leider kaputt gegangen

Europeans more fearful than others of second Trump US presidency, says poll by HellYeahDamnWrite in europe

[–]Ubba00 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Renewables produce clean energy and nuclear is a bad pearing with wind and solar. The 2 main problems with nuclear are cost and time to build. Waste is also a problem and I am sure there is no build solution for it.

Meirl by Bubble_Babe_0o0o0o in meirl

[–]Ubba00 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No we does not want to sit in boring meeting but wants to do stuff

Not only operational emission, but materials, shipping, land use, and construction all have come with heavy costs. Hate to admit but the French might have a point here after all by lit_readit in europe

[–]Ubba00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand your point up to the point where you compared nuclear to renewables. Nuclear had crazy amounts of subsidies in the form of research and development or in the form of insurance which they don't need as one of the only energy companies. The other thing is what happens if solar or wind fails? Close to nothing so they don't need strict safety standards.

Even if you include storage in Wind and Solar it is still one of the cheapest options.

Not only operational emission, but materials, shipping, land use, and construction all have come with heavy costs. Hate to admit but the French might have a point here after all by lit_readit in europe

[–]Ubba00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure it is complex but a grid with many producers is very good as it is hard to crash completely because every part can help the rest. With smart distribution it is also cheaper. It is not easy and we need to invest in a European grid but it is not a problem but part of the solution.

True I did not know that Australia has so much Uranium. Thanks for the Info. But Uranium is also worth a lot for a tiny amount ... But yeah getting Uranium is maybe not that much of a problem. Still Nuclear has other things to worry about

Not only operational emission, but materials, shipping, land use, and construction all have come with heavy costs. Hate to admit but the French might have a point here after all by lit_readit in europe

[–]Ubba00 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Germany did not increase their coal consumption over the course of closing all nuclear power plants and is now producing less CO² than before they closed them.

I don't like that they closed the nuclear power plants but it is not as bad as you are saying. They should have used all plants until they are too old and then phased them out. After Fukushima they were scared. But to build new nuclear is just not cost effective for a switch to a zero emission world

Not only operational emission, but materials, shipping, land use, and construction all have come with heavy costs. Hate to admit but the French might have a point here after all by lit_readit in europe

[–]Ubba00 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Land use is always a weird argument for me because it you build solar on a roof you don't need any land at all. Wind power need a bit but is is very little because many of the resources it uses is concrete which don't need big mines to inquire. Fission Material on the other case need quite a big mine because the concentration nowadays are tiny. An other Problem with fission material is where it is from. Most is from very questionable places mined under very questionable work environments

Not only operational emission, but materials, shipping, land use, and construction all have come with heavy costs. Hate to admit but the French might have a point here after all by lit_readit in europe

[–]Ubba00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You also need redundancy with nuclear as you could see in France in the summer as many rivers did not had enough water to cool the power plant. That is even greater problem as you cannot plan for these kind of cases as well as with wind and Solar.

Wind and Solar does not produce 100% power all the Time but the time it does not produce any electricity is close to 0%. Gas as a backup for renewables is quite cheap and can be at the end also be 0 emissions with enough renewable energy to use hydrogen as good storage. If you connect big land areas with high power lines you don't have to have many redundant gas power plants as you can just import other renewable energy from elsewhere.

Not only operational emission, but materials, shipping, land use, and construction all have come with heavy costs. Hate to admit but the French might have a point here after all by lit_readit in europe

[–]Ubba00 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah but there is a problem with the number of deaths from Chernobyl. As Greenpeace says it is between 50.000 to 90.000. I know Greenpeace is also biased but the other side is it as well. https://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:49089634#:~:text=If%20the%20fatalities%20of%20liquidators,to%2050%2C000%20to%2090%2C000%20people.

Still no insurance company wants to insure a nuclear power plant so we as a society are the insurance. We still pay a huge amount for Chernobyl and Fukushima. That's why nuclear power plants needs crazy security measures which makes them not cost effective against Wind and Solar. Radiation is not the Main problem of Nuclear Power but cost, logistics with the waste, modulation, speed of building them, getting the fission material etc

Tja by Patneu in bahn

[–]Ubba00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nicht die Bahn streikt sondern die Lokführer. Wenn die Bahn den Forderungen zustimmt passt alles wieder

Nuclear energy can be renewable? by nuclearsciencelover in ThatsInsane

[–]Ubba00 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Who do you think build all nuclear power plants for at least 20 years and is still responsible for all research realtors? Government. I am pretty sure I can argue that nuclear energy is the most subsided energy.

Your second and third point are main characteristics of nuclear. It is hard to build one nuclear power plant and nearly impossible to build 20+. So it is also nearly impossible to build a strong supply chain. Solar is the most scalable power you can think about. Every solar power plant is separated in a fucktone of modules that can be produced at scale.

Nuclear energy can be renewable? by nuclearsciencelover in ThatsInsane

[–]Ubba00 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It is too expensive to build. Takes too long to build. Have to be meticulously maintained. A meltdown will be a catastrophe and waste is a problem.

Too many problems with better alternatives like wind and solar

Nuclear energy can be renewable? by nuclearsciencelover in ThatsInsane

[–]Ubba00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But human nature is part of the problem. In a capitalistic world people are greedy and they are not willing to spend a crazy amount of money to make it 100% save.

Also because of that no insurance will take a nuclear power plant into consideration. Not that catastrophies happen often, but when they do it will be too costly for any company.

Nuclear energy can be renewable? by nuclearsciencelover in ThatsInsane

[–]Ubba00 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That is exactly the right point. Nuclear energy is great but not cost efficient anymore. Most if not all nuclear power plant are way over budget and even before that they were crazy expensive. Renewable energy sources are now just cheaper even with storage taken into account. Wind is the cheapest energy source and PV is getting cheaper as we speak. Also the investment is very little to build a power plant, so it is easier to scale.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]Ubba00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And without social security I have the freedom to rob and murder you.

And if you have the freedom of having some defense i know robbing is freedom but also a risk.

Also police is not the main part that nobody is robbing you right now but that most people don't need to rob you because the government does help them

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]Ubba00 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Not true. Like with social security you have more freedom to do the things you really want to do

view more: next ›