• Diplomjodler@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      Tell that to the tens of thousands of people that were displaced. And the alternative to nukes is obviously not fossil fuels but renewable energy.

        • dalekcaan@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nuclear power as seen by someone who has no idea what nuclear power is.

          • leaskovski@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I know what nuclear power is, I’m just confused as to why someone would use the word nukes, which is clearly associated with the ammunitions.

            Nuclear power has its place in the energy generation system alongside natural energy sources.

            • dalekcaan@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Sorry if I was vague, I meant the person you were replying to doesn’t know what nuclear power is, which is why they use a fear mongering term like “nukes” to describe nuclear power.

    • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Your house is on fire, but the good news is I just saved a lot of money on my car insurance.

      The lesser of 2 evils is not a compelling argument for energy consumption when the Earth is dying.

      • Apollo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is a piss poor take.