• Astrealix@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Which each have their drawbacks. Just as an example, though not representative of the majority, what do you do about months of no sun in the Arctic Circle for solar power? There is no single solution to this problem. Nuclear is better than fossil fuels by far, and we should not just throw it away out of fear.

        • Astrealix@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          10 months ago

          And yet nuclear has killed less than even wind. Obviously death is not the only factor, which is why it should be a combination of both.

          Again, it’s just an example. There are loads of situations where solar and wind just don’t work — and they are both inconsistent, without battery technology nearly good enough to work on the order of days for an entire national grid, which could be potentially needed in the event of a storm.

          Nuclear waste is a problem, but one which is much more easily contained and much less dangerous than the CO2 that’s constantly being spewed into our air.