|
|
|
|
|
by Moldoteck
48 days ago
|
|
Because you can't have Chernobyl by design. Like physically. Nobody is downplaying the risks- not evacuating sick people and old people would have done far less damage regardless of the incident outcome. They just wouldn't have lived enough or a very small nr would have been affected And as said, what's worse. When incident was tackled and radiation levels known, govt didn't rush to lift the orders causing even more deaths. I'm not afraid of renewables and bess and never said that, don't put words in my mouth. I just realize that without nuclear countries will be bound to expanding gas firming if they dont have hydro, just like Germany. We can make a bet that even in 30y German emissions per kwh will still be worse than french ones due to this firming. In other words due to antinuclear policy in 50y of energiewende Germany will still have worse emissions vs France which did the job in about 20y of Messmer |
|
Looking at what is happening gas usage is cratering all over Europe. What you are saying is someone assuming nothing will ever change. Even though BESS and renewables are completely reshaping the markets.
Justifying your standpoint by that the renewable industry in the early 2000s didn't deliver enough results.
But you do realize that we live in 2026 right? That is an entirely different beast. That is the industry that is delivering all new capacity globally and causing Indias and Chinas coal usage to decline in absolute terms.
And that industry will continue to scale. While you're stuck advocating for the technology that doesn't even complement it.