Why is the left trying to shove alternative energies like wind and solar down everyone's throats when nuclear power is...

Why is the left trying to shove alternative energies like wind and solar down everyone's throats when nuclear power is both renewable, efficient and extremely green.

(((They))) don’t like cheap energy.

Because of Chernobyl, Fukushima the left thinks every nuclear plant is a disaster waiting to happen

Liberalism is predicated on people being retarded.

Muh smoke stacks. Liberals claim to be educated, but don't know the difference between smoke and steam.

You need to understand that the average libtard has a room-temperature IQ. They are not capable of understanding how nuclear works, why solar cannot ever meet our needs, of what the numbers mean regarding the safety and efficiency of power sources.
All libtards know how to do is what the Jews tell them to do. They serve the Jew because the Jew promises to grant their material wishes: all the sex they could ever want, all the drugs they could ever do, and a magic world with no labor and everything free and any person who ever disagrees with them about anything will immediately be thrown into prison and tortured to death.

money. they invest heavily in these sketchy solar and wind companies before demanding subsidies for them

Nukes scary to gender studies grads who got C- in basic science course

Wind and solar is literally infinite, with none of the downsides of nuclear.

Money laundering, in effect. Nuclear is made out to be an enemy specifically because its practically free.

It's because they're told to think that. Partisan politics is very easy to understand.

The leader says X. The sheep also say X.

>implying the board that denies climate change understands even elementary scientific concepts

>Nukes scary to gender studies grads who got C- in basic science course

> (OP)
>Wind and solar is literally infinite, with none of the downsides of nuclear.

Leaf proves the point.

>Nuclear is made out to be an enemy specifically because its practically free.
laughingwhores.jpeg

> what is Fukushima
> what is Chernobyl
> what is thousands of years of radioactive contamination

If you would switch the entire world over to nuclear, we would run out of nuclear fuel in like what? 25 years or something?

>he thinks wind power is a viable source of energy

the only thing wind is god for is blowing away shity leaf faggots such as yourself. solar is inefficient as fuck too. nuclear power is the only green energy source that could completely replace fossil fuel today

>anthropogenic climate change

>both renewable, efficient and extremely green.
Kekd irl at this

Honestly we need liquid salt reactors though

Its efficient, yes.

Because nuclear power requires white or China people.

White people disappear and all that nuclear waste kills everything on the planet or severely mutates it.

The disaster entails niggers can never be allowed to take over japan.

A nigger population would succumb to the nuclear radiation.

Africans aren't capable of ultra high tier infrastructure like the Japs.

Cool response. The trade of energy is a trillion dollar per year industry. A thousand year one time purchase energy source that converts practically infinite water into steam to drive turbines is a massive threat to entire countries.

leftist are 99% illiterate uneducated retards that consider shitting on a canvas and sucking a niggers dick in public and following trends of facebook "higher education" and the rest kikes and good goyim selling out your land to them

And the right is silent by not taking a side publicly because it would hurt the fossil fuel donors? Seems they never talk about it.

Yes, the issue is with capturing it. Turbines have to be limited in RPM and have a lock in case of storms, because wind is just too powerful. But if you could capture it, capturing the equivalent wind power of one single hurricane could power the entire planet for over 100 years.

Most likely.

>what is a earthquake
>what is communists inability to do anything right
>what is the fact that spent uranium fuel (aka nuclear waste) can be used for a multitude of other things over and over therefore no waste

>green
>makes toxic waste

Coal and natural gas are the greenest energies there are. Plants need CO2.

Wind and solar rely on components that need to be replaced which are made from rare earth metals which are finite.
Petroleum is literally more renewable than wind and solar.

Because every 30 years the economy needs a new meme to get investment

This argument never ceases to piss me off
>hurr deny climate change
First of all nobody fucking denies that our climate is changing, we're denying the fact that (((scientists))), who take huge wads of cash to publish bullshit , say that it's all our fault the climate is changing when in reality the climate is always changing
Remember when (((climate change))) was called global warming and they got laughed and ridiculed for fucking years before they changed the name so they would look less dumb?
Second of all the fact that you lefty liberal cunts bring up science like it's supposed to protect your ass when you mentally ill losers still think theres more than two genders DESPITE science telling us otherwise.
TLDR: FUCK OFF YOU RETARDED LEAF

Green energy is not about environmental protection. People who advocate never-ending third-world population growth cannot care about the environment.

Green energy is about control. Inserting marxist control into another sector of the economy. And as an added bonus, all forms of green energy are shit for one reason or another, or else have limited geographical applicability. This saps the economies and power of western countries, which pleases the marxist.

What is Thorium

> no nuclear waste
> no meltdowns
> no way for libtards to whine about it

Not so fast! Pic related.

>this post
I'm sure someone with your level of vocabulary is quite the accomplished academic, as well as intellectual in their spare time.

We should really, step on the gas.

Because they're scaredy cats and fell for the Chernobyl meme

Some don't know how safe nuclear is.Green Peace

Some invested in renewable energy. Elon Musk

Some think ;

>building nuclear plants takes decades
>in a decade we will have better nuclear plants design.
>therefore it will be unnecessary

Think about it. Solar and wind improves every year. You can apply new efficiency tweaks to the next batch of solar panels but nuclear plants get build in a DECADE.

It’s funny because this dude didn’t even die from the gun shot because he pointed it wrong. Just shot through his mouth. What a fucking idiot can’t even kill himself right

True, but it isn't always windy so even if you could for example capture all the energy of a hurricane you'd need a ridiculous amount of toxic batteries to store that energy.

Nuclear supplies energy on demand, and can change it's output to suit demand without the need to store anything. We should have been using fission for the last 40 years, all the capital that has gone into developing shit tier green energy, or locating additional petroleum reserves should have gone into fusion research (but muh petrodollar). If the Nazis had won the war, we'd have fusion power on our martian colony by now.

Production of solar panels, electric car batteries and steel for windmills does much more damage though.

> (OP)
Because that would make too much sense and would actually solve climate change. They need their environment gibs for whatever black projects the deep state does.

Literally every form of energy production creates toxic waste, nuclear produces the least

Different energy sources are appropriate for different use cases. Nuclear by its nature is a large scale enterprise that requires its customers to be shackled to communal infrastructure, which itself invites large scale government regulation. Sources such as solar, geothermal, and wind can allow for off grid living, minimizing the amount of interaction you have with the government and large corporations once you have your system setup. Production of the equipment in the first place often does require interaction but that's not an ongoing requirement. Obviously not all locales are appropriate for all energy sources but if you choose your location, lifestyle and technology wisely, you can be much better off with non nuclear, non fossil fuel energy production.

It's leftists, it's the general population. Uniformed people vote so we have to live with this.

DELET THIS

Nuclear is dispatchable, wind and solar are not. Larger generators associated with nuke plants are also more stable and handle grid transients better. Nuclear is base load generation, wind and solar are not.

...nuclear power is not renewable. we can't just pull uranium and thorium out of our asses.

>produces the least
> deadly radiation for thousands of years

Yes

Yes, because the hordes of plastic both visible and microscopic floating in the ocean, the massive swaths of deforested land with ecology irreversibly ruined, the agricultural runoff into rivers and oceans causing algae blooms and depleting oxygen and increasing biotoxins, the methane released from the livestock industry, the extinction of species directly caused by overhunting and other human development, the increased salinity of soils, lakes, and oceans caused by erosion which is in turn caused by deforestation, the ever increasing methylmercury content of oceans caused by industrialization and burning of coal and increasing surface area of natural mercury in rock unearthed by human activity, etc, etc, etc is all completely natural and would have happened anyway, right?

hshhahahahshahahahshahahshshahashahahh!
Get fucked, then have a snack of west pacific fish. Take a hand held radiation detector to a grocery store, you stupid fuck.

Just fucking bury it Hans. I live in a city where I literally drive over nuclear waste from the manhattan project daily. stop being a cuck faggot.

>its fake

>deadly radiation for thousands of years
>deadly

How is it deadly if no one is killed by it?
I mean how many Germans have been killed by nuclear waste?

The answer is zero. There has never been a deadly accident involving nuclear waste in Germany.

Because nuclear requires high industrial capacity, and when the shitlibs to turn the 1st world into the 3rd world, industrial capacity will be severely reduced. They knows this so they plan ahead.

>level of vocabulary
It's hilarious when libtards try to sound intelligent.

>how are solar panels made
>how are solar panels disposed of
>how are made batteries made
>how are batteries disposed of
>how is energy transported
>how badly does muh solar scale
>how does light work on spheres with limited space for food production and that think we call breathable air

>nuclear
>cheap

lol

>Think about it. Solar
You're apparently literally uneducated to the fact that the sun's total energy output to the earth is permanently capped at around 1000 watts per square meter. Also there's this thing called night.

You forgot prohibitive location demands. Wind is extremely specific about where it will work and where it will do nothing, and many think-tank solar power calculations assume that you can get 365 days of sun a year, which you can't in many places. There are more nuclear-usable rivers than permanently windy hills.

everytime one of these go boom, crack or melt well....

It is cheap for the quantity it puts out. The problem is that few companies want to make the large up-front long-term investment to build a plant when natural gas is at an all-time low and those plants go up quick and easy.

>deadly radiation for thousands of years
I can't imagine being as stupid as you are. I really can't.
Number of people who died last year from air pollution: 4.6 million.
Number of people who died last year from "deadly radiation": roughly zero.
We put all the "deadly radiation" in one location and put up a big sign telling people to stay out. Anyone stupid enough to go in there is probably doing humanity a favor by dying. Speaking of which, would you do me a favor and go in there?

>solar
>cheap

Hundreds of millions of people eat pacific seafood every single day.
What are you trying to imply, retard?

>Thinks climate change means plastic bottles.

The only time nuclear disasters happened was when A. the plant was being beaten to death by engineers who had no clue what they were doing but knew that they wanted more power, and B. when there was a record-breaking earthquake and record-breaking tsunami on the same day. Nuclear is just a steam engine with radiation instead of fire, functionally. You could relax the safety standards and still get away with almost spotless error record, meaning lots of cheap power, functionally forever.

>Capped
Doesn't matter yet. Current solar panels only extract one third of that 1000 watt.

>Night
Noone says you close all nuclear and gas plants. Should close coal though.

But let's say you need to power ten thousand homes. What do you choose? Solar is moduler. Solar gets better every year. Solar is low maintenance. Compared to alternatives it's better. Nuclear plants take a decade to build. They become outdated right away. Thry are regulated too much. But they must be regulated too much. The government can't just build them easily.

You‘re clueless.

You can literally reuse a lot of it. And even then it lasts a really fucking long time.

t. Actually took a nuclear reactors course

>Number of people who died last year from "deadly radiation": roughly zero.
Factually wrong. Have you never heard of radon?

Nuclear power is not renewable (though I am in favor of it as an intermediary source of power until technology for renewable sources and/or fusion reactors become economically and technologically viable on a large scale).

>level of vocabulary
>is intellectual in their spare time
>t.illiterate leftist retard

>humans influence the planet on a massive scale
>except when it comes to climate - that impossible!

Few die because it is treated with insane amounts of security which is hugely expensive.

That doesn't matter. A tiny amount of it lasts for so longs that it effectively doesn't matter.

What the fuck does a naturally occuring radioactive gas have to do with nuclear power?

>close nuclear plants
>spend a shit ton of money to intsall "green" energy
Oops, my country's policy maker know shit about electricity!
>forced to buy more expensive electricity from French nukes when your "green" is doing shit
>forced to pay someone to take your wasted electricity from your "green" plants when they're producing a shit ton more than anyone needs
Replying on a fickle energy source is a shit deal on every end. I hope people look at Germany and California and realize these "green" sources just don't scale up.

Feelings.

It's really not that expensive to dispose of it if uninformed voters don't get in the way like what happened with Yucca Mountain here.

How is radon related to nuclear energy
Please go play with your gender-nonbinary barbies, leaf, the adults are talking

>renewable
now lets not just throw words pointlessly out.

>Few die because it is treated with insane amounts of security which is hugely expensive.

No one has ever died because of nuclear waste from a commercial nuclear power plant in Germany. Period. Stop mincing words.
And it isn‘t hugely expensive, nuclear plants pay for that themselves and they still manage to produce the second cheapest electricity after hydro.

The radioactive decay Uranium 238 that is mined for nuclear reactors releases Radon which can affect miners, but it not a big concern by the time the fission reaction is underway.

>renewable
I'm all for nuclear energy, but, that's just wrong.

I was responding to the fact that people don't die from radiation. But it's related in that there's already enough natural sources of radiation without human activity introducing more. What happens if WW3 comes and countries' nuclear plants sustain damage?

pshh. You can't mention the world 'ecology' in front of amerifatties over ecology without being brandmarked as brainless SJW

They complain about climate scientists being bribed by some vague renewables lobby while taking all their education on climate change from Rebel media, even tho the jewish Ezra Levant is greatly connected to the Canadian oil industry

leftards think that nuclear is too dangerous because muh Chernobyl/Fukushima but ignore the fact that coal has caused several times more deaths and permanent illnesses than nuclear

"renewable" is the wrong word, but a lot of the waste produced by the old plants can be reused by more modern plants.

>room temperature IQ
>doesn't specify the units
Look, I agree with your general idea, but if we are measuring Temperature in Kelvin, 293K is room temperature and that's insanely high IQ

Who gives a fuck? Just use coal. Smokestacks are cool

>nuclear power
>renewable
I'm sorry, but anything that uses uranium as fuel is inherently non-renewable. The amount of this stuff on earth is limited.

Not really renewable, but definitely more sustainable than oil and gas. With new breeder reaction technology perhaps even more sustainable! :D

water is unllimited, it recycles into the air

What happens if WW3 comes and countries attach the blades from windmills to mechs as weapons
Wow stupid hypotheticals are fun and legitimate arguments

Don't call it renewable if it's not renewable, that's all.

The thing about nuclear materials is that they're radioactive whether you put them in the powerplant or not.

This is more reason to use them sooner.

It effectively doesn't matter, as long as we plan to transition to a better method of energy production in the future. Otherwise, it does matter; finite resources are finite - just like coal, and oil, and natural gas, uranium won't last forever.

I'm not knocking it as an option, it's efficient as hell and safer than most people realize. But it's not a permanent solution.