Cool graph and all, but nuclear power is not the way to go. It’s slow to construct, not flexible at all and very expensive. Building new reactors just isn’t viable when there’s wind and solar.
It very much is the way to go for many countries. Nuclear is expensive, but it takes up significantly less space, and is significantly more stable than solar and wind. They all should be used, but saying nuclear is “not the way to go” is flat out wrong.
Cool graph and all, but nuclear power is not the way to go. It’s slow to construct, not flexible at all and very expensive. Building new reactors just isn’t viable when there’s wind and solar.
This often has to do with expertise and demand. If we aren’t building them often, it becomes more difficult to build them.
What does this mean? It boils water. How flexible does it have to be to boil water?
So is the environmental crisis.
It very much is the way to go for many countries. Nuclear is expensive, but it takes up significantly less space, and is significantly more stable than solar and wind. They all should be used, but saying nuclear is “not the way to go” is flat out wrong.
I can only speak for Germany, which has more than enough space for renewables