Nobsi

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Look at France to see how 100% nuclear would have gone.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Do you realise that you can also build windmills... where you would put the Power Plant? On Land? And that would reduce the time and cost of construction?
You could also fill barren fields with solar panels and use space that not even a solar plant could use, this in turn also gives animals shade and helps biodiversity and bug species.
And doesnt have a third of its construction cost as running costs forever.
You can also scale wind turbines in minutes. Look at France how much it costs to have nuclear plants not running.

In what way can we reuse the nuclear waste?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Thank you for the paper.
This does indeed clarify exact numbers that i didnt have.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Thats what France said.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (8 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#Capital_costs

No, it isnt.
Safety isnt what makes nuclear expensive. You actually got rawdogged by Nuclear fanatics.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Whats the source on it being about as bad?
It releases methane, yes.
We don't have to do hydro. Wind and the Sun are already plenty enough.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (31 children)

Do you want to argue, that the construction of a nuclear power plant causes significantly less ecological stress and pollution than solar panels and windturbines?
Think about if you really want to claim that as a thing you actually believe in.
I'm just gonna throw some words in a pool.
concrete, steel, space, deforestation, river, 10+ Years construction time, heavy machinery, dust, natural habitats, fuel, mining, waste, noise, cost, france...
Thank you. i rest my case.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I really wanted to be right about this and checked what i follishly spat out as fact.
Linuxs market share is about 8%, i am going to add others to linux for good measure, because it probalby is in some way.

So yeah, you're right.
But that is still a tiny fraction compared to Windows with a not really trustworthy 74%

I forgot what the argument was about and at this point it doesnt really matter anymore. Linux users be talking about Windows a lot. Happens.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (50 children)

Just fill the Country with Solar, Wind and Water... won't take 10 years and will be cheaper too.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I dunno dude. 4 Billion People use computers and millions of users spread over several distributions is not a lot.
And with the amount of gatekeeping and arguing over what is and isnt the best i would also stay far away if i didnt administer servers. Even then i use windows most of the time.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd say face. I'm fine with lemmy not being so US centric.
But I'd appreciate it if we just all moved to yyyymmdd

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Okay listen... i fully support you in your choice to use the browser that works for you without spending time troubleshooting. But why Opera GX?

view more: ‹ prev next ›