Post #3162940
2023-09-02 10:23 UTC
@MisuseCase@twit.social @Benaresh@mastodon.social Yeah, it is a weird argument. It's like saying that supporters of hydroelectric dams want to undercut wind and solar. Just like nuclear, dams are a source of low-carbon electricity and take years to build.
It's a false dichotomy. Just take a look at China, continuously deploying new solar, wind _and_ nuclear (not to mention coal 😢) power plants.
This comment reminded me of this comic: https://c.im/@deonandan/110219931041880521
Replies (1)
-
@Benaresh@mastodon.social 2023-09-02 11:59
@jackofalltrades@mas.to @MisuseCase@twit.social A stonetoss Comic? Seriously? Anyway about China: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_China#Future_projects "In 2018, a Nuclear Engineering International journal analysis suggests a below-plan capacity of 90 GWe is plausible for 2030." Meanwhile around 200 GW of renewable capacity, according to Caroline Zhu, senior analyst with S&P Global Commodity Insights and thats for 2023 alone. China planned and failed to come near its 200GW Plan for 2035. Like its said overpromised underdelivered.