Hacker News Reader

Comment by ThomPete | Hacker News Reader

That's not a problem with nuclear that's a problem with people.

Cost overruns come from extreme security legislation and the fact that we haven't built enough so those are simply not proper arguments.

Add on top of that that solar will never, as in never ever be able to deliver cheap (at scale), clean, plentiful and consistent energy which is the minimum requirement for any type of energy any sane person would support.

Promoting something that is currently not providing more than 1% of the worlds energy being heavily favored politically and with plenty of subsidies and which will never support maybe more than 10% of the worlds energy needs which is being very generous sounds like something the world will look back at in a hundred years and think "What the hell were they thinking".

View on HN

Blowing off real problems with breezy, unsupported denial is not helping your credibility. If your goal is effective advocacy you should be acting like a nuclear engineer, acknowledging the problems, and talking in detail about how they’re being addressed in-depth. I generally agree that we need nuclear power but that’s because I’ve read those articles rather than what you’re posting in this thread.

What is unsupported in what i have said?

Here’s an example: “The amount of nuclear waste that actually exist is microscopic”

It’d be wonderful if it’s true but you didn’t exactly cite sources or otherwise explain how a claim which has been not true to a degree which has factored into national politics is no longer true.

I don't have to cite anything. It was claimed there where a lot but not actually demonstrated. Why should I prove a negative?

Because your goal is to be an effective advocate?

> That's not a problem with nuclear that's a problem with people.

This is very much the "true communism has never been tried" argument, isn't it? Unless you know a way of building it without people?

No its not at all the same cause thats not what i mean. I mean that people are ignorant to the dangers not that its dangerous. Has nothing to do with communism, wind and solar on the other hand do.

>Has nothing to do with communism, wind and solar on the other hand do.

Showing your hand there.

No but you are.

Having no problem with misrepresenting what other say.

I was replying to this:

"This is very much the "true communism has never been tried" argument, isn't it? "

Which you very well know. So yeah thanks for showing your hand.

Well, if that is the level at which you would like to discuss this, I turned around and touched the ground already, so no backsies.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com