5 comments

[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 18.5 ms ] thread
In a world full of climate change denial, is it really a good look to continually accuse people who acknowledge the reality of climate change of not really believing in it if they don't adopt specific proposal X that you like?

There must be a million ways to express the idea that nuclear power has a part to play in solving climate change without attacking people as liars and hypocrites.

The anti-nuclear self-proclaimed environmentalists simply do not seem to understand the concept of "Base Load." They believe, or pretend to believe, that industrial civilization can be powered by "sunny days when the wind is blowing" energy, and doesn't need 24x7 365 days a year energy.

I call this arithmetic denialism.

If you don't want to be an arithmetic denier, show me the energy source that can provide 24x7 energy all 356 days a year in sufficient quantity to power industrial/technological civilization. I see a startling lack of any energy source that passes muster with the anti-nuke sort of "environmentalist."

Call that what you like...

(comment deleted)
It can cause serious issues in the future. I read that even in tiny doses radiation can cause serious diseases. I think it'a big problem. Nowadays there are huge variety of personnel monitoring devices like here https://ecotestgroup.com/ that serve to measure radiation dose which is accumulated by a user. I bought one for home use too.