[Nasrudith]

Can we actually show that nuclear weapons are bad for the environment? Obviously there is a baseline production cost and various detonation costs plus issues of trying to get a scalar judgement from a complex systtem but they could perversely be helpful theoretially by stopping other polluting activities.

Isn't it perversely possible that the environmental impact of another two more Iraq War scale conflicts plus end of ongoing middle east presence means that ironically Bitcoin and nuclear weapons combined could help the environment net in comparison.

Sort of the logic behind a joke "They say that nuclear weapons kept the cold war cold, they say want peace in the middle east yet when I give Palestine Iran and Palestine nuclear ICBMs suddenly I am now the bad guy here?"

[boc]

When 99% of people say "good for the environment" it's implied that the point of protecting the environment is to sustain human life on Earth. Nuclear conflict is not compatible with sustainable human life.