Europe

8485 readers

1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out [email protected]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Nuclear energy has no place in a green Scotland (greens.scot)

submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

39 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Nuclear power leaves a long and toxic legacy.

Mr Ruskell said: “There is nothing safe, secure or green about nuclear energy, and many people across Scotland will be dismayed and angry to hear that the Secretary of State is seeking to open a new reactor in Scotland.

“Aside from the brazen entitlement and the message this sends, it ignores that people in Scotland have long rejected nuclear energy. I hope that all progressive parties will unite in condemning this environment wrecking overreach.

“A new reactor would not only be unsafe, it would be extremely costly and would leave a toxic legacy for centuries. It would also distract from the vital work we need to do to boost clean, green and renewable energy.

“That is why I hope all progressive parties can rule out any return to nuclear power once Torness has been decommissioned.

“The Hinkley point shambles has exposed the UK government’s total inability to deliver nuclear programmes on budget or on time. We would be far better investing in the huge abundance of renewable resources that we already have here in Scotland.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

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

This hits the nail on the head! It's rare to see a sane and realistic take on nuclear online.

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

You find "sane and realistic" to claim that 77 people died due to the Chernobyl accident?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

It appears to be a widely quoted official figure and have no insight on if it is realistic. I am also aware that this does not consider the considerable environmental impact of the disaster, nor the economic cost to clean up the mess.

My comment was more relating to the facts about the current state of renewables.

The 2 options this comments OP provides at the end are what I mostly agree on, where we either go 0 carbon now and accept nuclear (with its flaws) as base load, or continue with carbon intensive tech as base load and continue to build out renewables on top.

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

That's some wild take on Soviet propaganda.

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

Soviet propaganda? What the hell are you on about?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Nuclear energy has, by a staggering margin, the lowest death toll of any form of energy generation per kW produced. And almost all of these come from Chernobyl, where 31 people died due to the explosion, then a further 46 died due to radiation poisoning from the cleanup.

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

That's not soviet propaganda though. That's UN numbers.

Maybe if you weren't such a fucking moron you'd be able to look into it yourself.

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

lol It's the official numbers provided by the SU. But your ad hominem projection really shows that you don't have any argument in this anyway. Fucking clown.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

And it's the numbers the UN have verified. Moron.

You're honestly so fucking stupid. Keep gobbling fossil fuel industry cock, dipshit.

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

Your insults & attacks just underline your lack of understanding of politics and the castrated nature of the UN. But keep on spewing bullshit propaganda for terrorist states.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Lmao you're the one being insulting, dipshit. Sorry you don't understand a highly researched event and are too fucking dumb to look into it. Seriously. I truly am sorry that you have to live with being that fucking dumb.

Keep spewing propaganda for big oil companies and petrostates like Russia, scum.

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

I think we can end this here, since you're just repeatedly projecting at this point.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Cool beans, petrosimp. I'll even give you the opportunity to get the final word in, since you clearly want it. Go ahead.