Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
a lovely poster
Aug 5, 2011

by Pipski
Well, Japan has decided that fossil fuels are a better option than nuclear. Awesome.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-19595773

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

a lovely poster
Aug 5, 2011

by Pipski
Well, us loving it up is just a part of life. As to what happens when we do inevitably gently caress it, the answer is much less bad consequences then the everyday poo poo we see from fossil fuel sources. Basically,

Fossil Fuels > Nuclear > Renewables

I would love to have a 100% renewable powered society. I totally AGREE with:

CombatInformatiker posted:

I still think that we should strive for renewables providing as much of the energy as is sensible, with nuclear picking up the slack.

The first priority is getting off of fossil fuels. That means shutting down coal and natural gas plants ASAP. If renewables can pick up those losses, great, let's see it done! Otherwise, let's go with nuclear. I think that the main point of disagreement between the pro-nuke and anti-nuke side here is how much power renewables can generate as a percentage of what is necessary.

Anyone who's scared of Nuclear for safety reasons is just a goddamn fool. Nuclear has killed less people per watt generated than any renewable technology. http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply