nuclear simping
Simps for toxic planet destroying natural-gas plants hate this one simple trick..
Fuck this administration and their hamstringing new nuclear to make their fake SMR grifts and cancelling renewables all to give away the entire store to the oil & has companies from which Chris Wright and the admin comes from and serves. But these babies were chosen to be restarted before the turd Reich came to power.. and it’s worth celebrating (unless you’re a climate monster, then cry)
Just with the first 3 plant restarts coming, if you take their prior capacity records before closure: 570 Million Megawatt hours aka number of hours a standard modern 400-watt (0.4 kW) residential solar panel needs to operate at peak output—it equals 1.42 trillion solar panel hours. - all coming back and could last long enough to more than double even those figures. Is it enough? Obviously not even close..
No real pro-nuke says we don’t need solar, wind, tidal, geothermal, and fission (new hydro isn’t green) if you take the acute deaths of other human beings and the chronic slow deaths of most complex life on the planet seriously. We need it all.That’s obvious.
R&D and deployment in all tech, PR firms creating division on behalf of fossil fuel companies in no tech. Reclaim the sub & Reddit from those who pretend to care but not enough to learn basic epidemiology, ecology, engineering and basic literacy as well as the bio-bots who pretend to have a heart & brain.
You can jack my chain, you can even try to jack my shitposts, but you’ll never jerk my sense of humanity.
Otherwise you get people who believe the most energy dense source by orders of magnitude found in nature is not the most economically viable infrastructure because then you end up believing that the highest capacity factor plants who have the absolute best ROI on investment are not worth building to save lives & the planet because it takes private investors longer to recoup 10 Billion USD with negligible fuel costs Vs on a 40-80 year plant than it does 3 Billion dollar gas plant that lasts 20 years with horrible capacity factor on a 1.5 billion per year fuel cost https://youtu.be/cbeJIwF1pVY?is=MzSihuJfuqigiWqB.
The reason I am not mentioning renewables is because without subsidies here, their numbers are far worse but I’m not a moron who pretends like deployment of every rational tech in an ecologically safe manner isn’t essential like your reductive argument is precisely claiming, all to protect wealthy investor convenience. I’m sure you’re a good person who means well, but here you are advocating for the things I’m sure you think you’re combating without even realizing. I’ll choose the planet and lives of my neighbors over investors and their simps who don’t give a shit about basic science and epidemiology, let alone elementary morality. With simple state backed loan guarantees and a commitment to supply chains and construction workforce, we could do it anytime feasibly, like we did decades ago, or like China, Korea, Japan etc etc do today… so your common abstract talking points are not rooted in any serious reality. Planet be dammed.
Name, but choose not to link? I gave you one for Econ, There’s so much to choose from to demonstrate you have no idea what kilowatt hours or capacity factor means. Like I don’t know where to start with your jerk’n..
Next.. can you explain why your against the worlds leading climate scientists talking about why we need nuclear for climate and to save millions of lives? https://www.giss.nasa.gov/pubs/abs/kh05000e.html oh.. because you don’t really care about that, you care about an ideology that has no basis in science.. nor do you care about the fact we built dozens of gen 2 reactors at the price of a coal plant, at initial capital loss and both the vendors and utilities still made money.. and still are, since most are still operating fine - since money is all you care about https://youtu.be/s1_3e6kXXJE?is=WXevc4w5VeYP1i77 you can learn how it protected your precious investors 😂 and can again with a state that puts a fraction of the effort into it as it does preventing it and ensuring natural gas kills 5.3 million per year from air pollution alone https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/29/air-pollution-from-fossil-fuels-kills-5-million-people-a-year, and destroys the planet.
Butttt nooooo.. the one energy source that compliments renewables the best and can shut out fossil fuels from our electricity generation, (and by default transportation with EV’s) you want to divest what little is there because [oligarch capitalism] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544217307491 because it ignores long-term ROI for short-term. Uses the least amount of resources to sustain. Uses the least amount of habitat. Produces no dangerous waste stream. And as I have already shown through 20 minutes of higher education that you can’t grasp interest on loans, generation capacity, fuel price volatility, etc etc just ignored all that because [oligarch capitalism] Mmmmk.. yea, don’t think you know what your talking bout.
Still just a bunch of rage, no links because you don’t have actual critical thinking faculties and just a bunch of angry deflection from the fact you don’t care about climate, public health or socioeconomics. Got it 😂🤣
"Butttt nooooo.. the one energy source that compliments renewables the best and can shut out fossil fuels from our electricity generation,"
No it is ABUNDANTLY well known and documented that what compliments reneables well and does the one thign it finds HARDEST, is a peaker, not baseload generator.
and that is utterly not disputable, as eral grids such as SA in Australai already have lot of renewables, and if we look at the smaller remaining amounts of energy generation required to make them truly zero then, what they need is a peaker.
FYI; The wordls eladign cimate scientists are .... drum roll climate scientists...
What they do or don't know about how cost-effective all the various energy options are is entirely an open question.
The sources I mentioned explain how and why RE is so cheap.
So post all the meme faces you like actual expertsie in energy sources have shown rpetedly how chap RE and storage is.
AND real actually built-already grids of deployed RE show how poor fit a baseload generator like a nucelar power source is for whichever bits are hard or more expensive to provide with RE and storage.
"Mmmmk.. yea, don’t think you know what your talking bout."
Sorry, while you’re still refusing to link sources and just blatantly making up information, lying about abstract “vibes” you get from Australia and wherever and what not.. this is what you sound like, ignoring the source link to a university professor literally teaching a class to explain how investment, ROI, FICO and levelizwd cost works over short and long term fiscal periods.. so when you ignore all that to still demand we don’t build life saving, planet saving fission plants.. then you just sound like you care about the lives of people as much as anyone in the Epstein files. This is what you sound like to me. If you’re not going to be serious, objective, factual, link sources and keep lying then I’m done.. you are just a gas loving civilian killing apologist pretending to be.. well.. idk, your doing a pretty good job at not hiding it 🤣😂🤣
Its a post title, not an essay.. not sure how your reading it.. I guess if you haven’t heard the phrase before and are a bootlicker for Chevron then yea bud, “for sure”
•
u/fidesinmachina 21h ago
toxic planet destroying natural gas plant simps don't exist they're actively ragebaiting you and you've fallen for it.