Greens keep ignoring energy density and therefore land use to make the case for a "greener" 100% wind/solar/hydro grid
Greens keep ignoring energy density and therefore land use to make the case for a "greener" 100% wind/solar/hydro grid
Greens keep ignoring energy density and therefore land use to make the case for a "greener" 100% wind/solar/hydro grid
You're viewing a single thread.
Personally I think the only problem with nuclear is that it has to be near a large natural water source that stays very stable. Due to already ongoing climate change, there's not a lot of safe large bodies of water. Either you're so far above sea level you risk running dry, or your so close that you're at risk of flooding. There are still some places it's a good idea, but they're few and far between.