[joshypants]

Because nuclear takes too long to spin up - we don't have time.

[ericvanular]

Nuclear takes time but I don't think the solution is going to come through only one approach. It seems like we'll need a mix of technologies to actually solve this problem. Nuclear provides clean base load in many places currently (e.g. more than 60% of the base power in Ontario)

[kortilla]

Well then we just keep burning gas/coal for base load. Congrats on wrecking the planet.

[joshypants]

We have 10 years to cut 50% of emissions. We literally can't build enough nuclear plants in that time, it's very slow. It's also really expensive. We have to use other renewables.

[powerbroker]

We should a) build renewable; and b) build nuclear reactors with the idea that you will insert rods, to decrease power output when the winds are blowing strong, and restore power when the winds have dampened. Outcome, lowered nuclear waste from the plant, fewer expensive battery storage (or pumped hydro).

[ericvanular]

Hey powerbroker, would love to have your opinions over at https://collective.energy

[hanoz]

> We have 10 years to cut 50% of emissions.

Do we!? What happens otherwise? Because it's a cast iron certainty that global emissions won't be anywhere near 50% less in ten years time.