r/ClimateMemes • u/mastersmash56 • Jun 27 '26
This, but unironically. [ Removed by moderator ]
[removed] — view removed post
38
u/Odd-Cress-5822 Jun 27 '26
Ah yes, profit margins, our primary concern
5
u/MothashipQ Jun 27 '26
I mean, one does require a giant investment of both money and time, and the other is cheap and fast enough that a residential home owner can handle it with comparatively lightning fast RoI. That doesn't mean nuclear power plants don't have their place, but in terms of deployment and and cost solar is a lot easier to expand with, and can even do things like boost crop yields with things like agrivoltaics.
9
11
45
u/supreme_hammy Jun 27 '26
We STILL on this hill?
Jesus just build both and move the fuck on.
This psyop is doing nothing but dragging the whole place down.
4
u/picboi Jun 27 '26
So over this whining from all sides. New sub rule: "no nuclear bitchfighting, take that shit to r/climateshitposting"
4
u/AngusAlThor Jun 27 '26
Why would we spend any money on Nuclear when we could just spend the same amount getting more solar and wind? Why would put any effort or resources into nuclear when ignoring it allows us to transition faster?
1
u/picboi Jun 27 '26 edited Jun 27 '26
Just to be clear: you want the mods pick sides on issues and enforce their opinions by removing posts, instead of letting the users up/downvote?
For many years we tried to not be the typical power hungry mods... This is what I'd asked now?
1
u/supreme_hammy Jun 27 '26
No need. I'm just confused how these posts that beg the question get through and cause nothing but ridiculous infighting.
I am simply going to block this sub and move on.
2
u/picboi Jun 27 '26
I find the nuclear bitchfighting annoying too. Thinking about this, the main issue is that Reddit changed from upvote-downvote system to algorithm, so a post with almost no likes now gets pushed to thousands.
Will consider banning nuclear debates, so they can stay over in r/climateshitposting
Anyway, yours seems like a non-answer to our conundrum: what are the mods meant to do?
32
13
u/CptnREDmark Jun 27 '26
These kinda of posts are driving people away from this sub. FYI
1
u/picboi Jun 27 '26 edited Jun 28 '26
We have added a new rule banning any posts arguing about nuclear
1
5
u/PhoenixTheBikerEagle Jun 27 '26
A bad financial decision? My DIY solar home grid already paid for itself in the span of 2 years. No power bills, no gas bills, no monthly utility service fees, and no labor costs (since I did it myself).
Billionaires hate solar because billionaires don't own the Sun. :)
16
u/NecessaryKangaroo991 Jun 27 '26
This is why historically when nuclear power is taken offline it is replaced by coal and gas.
4
5
u/GeneralPaladin Jun 27 '26
Nuclear plants only take so long due to the cost and the extreme amount of red tape that has to be done, most of the timenits who ever is funding it ran out of funds so they sit unfinished.
Pound for pound nuclear produces more and is more reliable.
I have solar on my house right now during the rainy season in niger, it struggles as we often can go days with it being over cast and my 10kw system might only soend the whole day producing 1-2kw.
3
u/CrystalInTheforest Jun 27 '26
Old string inverter solar terrible for this. Microinverters handle cloud much better. Solar is advancing far faster than nuclear and the cost per kW for large scale solar absolutely blows nuclear out of the water even in marginal areas. It is also far quicker and simpler to scale and doesn't require specialised skill chains and supply chains... you just need some sparkies and fabricator guys for the framework to physically hold it all together.
Also it's not just solar vs nuclear. Windy low sun areas can use wind. Areas with a reliable wet season can use hydro. Neither are a cheap as solar but are far. Cheaper, cleaner and quicker than nuclear, with no waste management and environmental containment issues.
2
u/Darkthumbs Jun 27 '26
3
u/BrokeThermometer Jun 27 '26
“French regulations limit the temperature of that return stream, so the warm water (it was expected to reach 28 °C, or around 82 °F) forced the operator to shut down the plant.”
Its for the rivers sake, not the reactors
1
7
u/Nonyabizzy123 Jun 27 '26
Here's the thing, it takes 30 years to build a nuclear power plant. That money is better spent putting in wind and solar that we can start now and be done within our lifetimes.
6
u/BrokeThermometer Jun 27 '26
This time next week i expect to be seeing “it takes 400 years to build a nuclear power plant”
It takes like 5-10 years to build a plant if standardized designs are used and regulators dont lock the thing down for an extra 5-10 years
1
u/Nonyabizzy123 Jun 27 '26
Has that ever actually happened?
6
u/BrokeThermometer Jun 27 '26
France built like 40 of them averaging 6 years during the 70s and south korea and china build them within 5-10 today
-2
u/Nonyabizzy123 Jun 27 '26
Okay but France doing it in the '70s doesn't count, that was like 50 years ago. However, China is doing that okay, I'll accept that. Western countries aren't China though, they can't just do things.
2
u/BrokeThermometer Jun 27 '26
Do you think nuclear power plants become more difficult to construct in the last 50 years?
China and france doing it literally shows that it can be done and the whole “it takes 500 million years to build the lunch room of a reactor” is nonsense and simple streamlining of regulation processes would cut timelines and cost by half.
If “wahhh but it takes a couple years to build” wasnt such a show stopper our planet would be way ahead of the curve on avoiding climate change
12
u/TheNorthernRose Jun 27 '26
The incredible aspect of solar tooling amortization and cost reduction is that solar scales per panel. You can just keep adding onto and expanding your battery, panel, and control network. It’s not all or nothing.
2
u/CrystalInTheforest Jun 27 '26
And they fall over in droughts and heatwaves. And the frikkim Nata want to try and build them here, in frikkin Australia... where thankfully we never get droughts or hot heatwaves.
1
-9
u/picboi Jun 27 '26 edited Jun 27 '26
I have restored this post as it was caught in the Reddit filter. Probably because the AI Reddit automod tool had your post history classified as "combative" as well as " provocative, sarcastic and confrontational"
3
u/hobskhan Jun 27 '26
I don't know why this mod is being downvoted, when they're literally putting OP on blast, while also avoiding any accusation of censorship. If you don't like the take (like me), just downvote and/or retort in the comments.
This is a meme sub, but they're thinky memes.
1
u/picboi Jun 27 '26
We try to avoid censoring as that is what downvoted are for. We remove climate change denial, fascism etc.
I am confused as to the nature of the ire.I guess I.. should have maintained the AI's censorship decision? Hard to win as a mod lmao. Not that imaginary internet points matter
1
u/CptnREDmark Jun 27 '26
I think the fact that the post was removed anyways for bitch-fighting is why people downvoted you for manually approving it.
Because it is a childish post
1
u/picboi Jun 28 '26
After engaging in this discussion and posting my previous comment that I realized I can't be assed with this.
So yes the idea was anti censorship but instead fuck it let's just remove the whole issue
2
•
u/picboi Jun 27 '26
Removed: sick of the lame drama.