Why did kikes sabotage nuclear?

>>109840006
Because nuclear is so easy to sabotage, while solar is much much harder. They've backtracked lately thought and they're trying their best to sabotage solar and promoting nuclear.

>>109840006
Bro, you don't have to pin this on anyone. Invisible poisonous particles that kill you 5-10 years later scare the shit out of people. Fukoshima, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, all scared people.
>But those were...
I know. You're preaching to the choir. But I remember how scared shitless every reporter got when the spent rods at Fukushima caused the steam explosion. You have to overcome that.

>country had a nuclear project planned
>fukushima happens
>not a peep since
wonder if they have the balls to try again one day

nuclear is really really expensive, and only worth it in really big scales. China & india make them worth it, maybe the US & former ussr, but not for the other countries
the only way would be an international consorcium for developing it. but for what nowdays? op shows the elephant in the room, a big international electric grid interconnection consortium to connect the world in the same way as the internet or whatever would be better in every regard. sahara could power asia night, americas deserts could power africa & europes nights etc...
but we seem more focues on batteries which is something i guess
point is dont forget that the nuclear power we have is a side effect of the nuclear proliferation

>>109840030
I've heard of attempts to sabotage solar by people saying that the materials used to make panels were made in Africa by slaves and therefore it's bad or something. No way I'll find the source now, sorry.

File: file.png (1.12 MB, 859x617)

1.12 MB PNG

>>109840807
Oh man, if they think that's bad, you should see what is done to mine Uranium.

File: file.png (1.32 MB, 1705x949)

1.32 MB PNG

>>109841133
oops, wrong image.

>>109841133
>>109841144
You fallacious piece of shit.
Uranium mining is an industrial process without involving any unskilled or child labor and besides a single case of cold war area soviet site tailings are never placed upstream above a freshwater aquifer.

>>109840003
It's an exponential. Solar will be 70% of electricity output by 2040.

>>109841324
The tailings are far worse than child mining. They contaminate crops for millions of people and will contaminate them for centuries.

Solar: Generating 5000% of supply when no one needs it.
>but if I spend trillions on batteries I have to replace every 7 years best case
I know.

>>109840006
Because they went all in 30 years ago

>>109842037
>All in
On greenfaggotry. See Germany

Gas is renewable and probably the best out of all, in terms of raw power and environmental impact

>>109840174
>Invisible poisonous particles that kill you 5-10 years later
you mean fly ash? yeah good thing we shut those down

File: Picture1rp3c.jpg (75 KB, 935x525)

75 KB JPG

>>109841885
The only case where anything close to the scenario you claim to be common happened is Mailuu-Suu, a small town affected by the soviet nuclear weapons program.
Modern, nuclear energy focused uranium mining doesn't come anywhere near close to that.

Also the tailings aren't anywhere near close to the toxicity you make it out to be, it's just the stuff that's left after they've extracted the uranium and it's less toxic than what was in the ground originally. It's still an issue because it's above ground and not below it now but modern sites are built with radiometric control in mind.

>>109840006
>30 years building time
B-But China!
>Chinesium tier materials and 0 security setup

>>109842167
france used to mass-produce reactors too.
it can be done, the issue is that it takes political will and not regulations changing WHILE THE PLANTS ARE BEING BUILT, because that requires retrofits and prevents economies of scale. Yuros let more people die from heat than ever died from fukushima.

>>109842456
Sounds like an inherit problem with nuclear that solar, wind, and batteries do not have an issue with.

>>109842591
no, it's not inherent, that's the point.

>>109842603
There is huge political will and regulations going against solar, wind, and batteries, but it still keeps getting built en masse. Nuclear is just too vulnerable to politics.

>>109842613
The political will is being hamstrung by courts and federal-state disagreements. and trump did manage to get offshore wind canceled. And he has only been at it for a few years. If he had a decades-long campaign like the anti-nuclear lobby he'd probably succeed.
Another factor is that PV panels are made in china, so as long as tariffs are no punitive it's kind of hard to undermine decentralized economic efforts.
Nuclear on the other hand is big centralized infrastructure built locally, there are many more avenues of shutting it down.

>>109842633
i.e. Nuclear is too vulnerable to politics. Solar, Battery, and wind isn't. Therefore, solar, wind, and battery is superior.

>>109842649
Perhaps, but that's not a problem of the technology, it's very much a problem of humans. They could solve by just choosing not to do that.

>>109842456
>france used to mass-produce reactors too.
that was a side effect of the nuclear weapon program
also france cannot refine uranium (anymore?)

>>109840003
Yet prices won't come down..

>>109840003
>spend 50+ years smearing nuclear
>guys we finally surpassed it!
>increase deaths and CO2 emissions by orders of magnitude to feel good
Total boomer death. Total hippy holocaust (torture very much included).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0afQ6w3Bjw
Ironically, this video made me somewhat less enthused about nuclear. Just the amount of safety requirements and dipshits paid to sit around ticking boxes for red tape. It's just so much easier to slap down a field of panels and call it a day.

File: controlling biters in factorio.mp4 (3.04 MB, 720x1280)

3.04 MB MP4

>>109842906
And one might think "Well China should have very little of that! They're a ""communist"" country with an emphasis on collectiveness than individualism!", and instead they just build and install solar panels 100 times faster and have made little progress on nuclear reactors.

>>109842941
China's building quite a bit of nuclear, but yes also a shit load of solar.

>>109840006
It's a garbage technology and only deployed because you can build nukes from the waste

>>109842167
more like 30 years of red tape you dicksucking ape

>>109842110
> are never
>doesn't come anywhere near close to that
hmmmm?

>>109840003
Dam. Look at that growth.

>>109842941
Looks like AI slop. The placement doesnt make sense

>>109840006
Most fuel is in Africa and based niggas get uppity against tiny hat people sometimes

>>109842659
Human problems are harder to solve.