• basmatii@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Then nuclear is your option, not the option that permanently destroys water tables for billions.

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I believe the biggest source of emissions for nuclear actually come from the construction phase, so getting past that, maybe. Still would be preferable to also reduce energy use so that the “better” source can be spread more efficiently.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I believe the biggest source of emissions for nuclear actually come from the construction phase,

        While construction would be huge for emissions, I would guess the most emissions would come from the mining, transport, refinement, and disposal efforts for the fuel on an ongoing basis.