• Zagorath
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    people who thought (with some merit) that nuclear was a good idea 30 years ago

    As you say, it had some merit. In fact I’d go so far as to say it’s a damn shame we didn’t build significant amounts of nuclear 30+ years ago.

    Unfortunately today the only people supporting nuclear are the same ones wanting to delay the move away from fossil fuels, and the “useful idiots” (as another user in this thread put it—though ironically they were using it to refer to those in favour of renewables) who don’t recognise how much more economical renewables are and how much more able to combat climate change they are. The “useful idiots” are coming from a well-meaning place. They’re just not up-to-date on the economics.

      • Zagorath
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Of course who does not agree with you suddenly is called “idiot”.

        Well, no. Somebody else was calling me an idiot for following the evidence that says nuclear is too expensive and renewables are a better option. I simply pointed out that their claim works far better pointed at them than it does at me.

        And look, I’m not old enough to have been politically engaged 50 or 30 years ago. Practically, it doesn’t matter what we should or should not have done 30 years ago. We need to evaluate the conditions of today and decide what’s the best option.

        And the evidence is clear: that’s renewables.

    • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree but I think the nuclear ship has sailed. Astroturfing can influence public sentiment but it can’t change economics.