Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

crbatey22 t1_is1g0mo wrote

Fine. Then call the tax break side of things ‘incentives’. It really doesn’t make a difference and is just semantics.

Both fossil fuel providers and renewable providers receive both ‘subsidies’ and ‘incentives’.

Do you not think that, knowing what we know now, and considering the global situation, those ‘incentives’ and ‘subsidies’ should go to renewables (and in my opinion, nuclear) rather than fossil fuels?

1

gullible_guy t1_is1hqpo wrote

No, it isn't just "semantics"
What "global situation"?

Again, not taxing someone, is not the same as taking tax dollars from other people and giving them to another person.

I do agree we should be pushing Nuclear tech, its the only 100% thing that both sides should agree on as its the cleanest and safest form of energy we have right now.

Renewables are not real yet. Tech is getting closer, but i drive though somerset daily, and 50% of the days the shit ain't even spinning.

"renewables" are not cleaner when you look at the overall contribution to negative environmental impacts.

Its honestly just a way to funnel money into peoples pockets.

aka Solyndra.(google it you might be too young)

0

crbatey22 t1_is1ouwm wrote

I was not aware of Solyndra, but probably because it was a US firm. I am in France. Also I’m 37?!

The global situation I’m talking about is the effect that human CO2 emissions are having on the climate, alongside the unstable geopolitical situation faced by many countries being beholden to the Petrodollar and the whims of OPEC, or relying on mafias masquerading as national gouvernements (aka Russia) for your energy supply.

With regards to renewables not being ready. Quite honestly that’s just incorrect. Countries that have invested heavily in offshore wind, solar and hydro are regularly able to cover all of their energy needs using only renewables.

Where renewables are lacking is in energy storage. But this is a well known problem, hence the need for nuclear to bridge the gaps.

Your comment concerning wind turbines not turning is really indicative of your lack of knowledge of energy grids. When turbines are not turning, generally it is because there is a lack of energy demand in an area that has coal or gas plants as their main source of power. These types of plants cannot be shut down and restarted quickly to deal with fluctuations in demand, so the wind turbines get shut off in their place.

Your comment about CO2 emissions in construction is correct. Particularly for offshore wind, which uses around 10 times more concrete than a coal plant to construct. But the efficiency and output of wind turbines in particular are increasing year on year, resulting in a shorter and shorter CO2 payback/break even period. Where’s coal/gas plants only have increasing emissions throughout their life, and are even worse when mining and materials transport for the life of the plant is accounted for.

Surprisingly, nuclear plants have the lowest concrete usage on average for new construction, and their only ongoing CO2 emissions are due to transport of materials, which is minuscule.

The problem French nuclear plants increasingly face at the moment (aside from maintenance worker strikes and unexpected shutdowns due to inspection findings) is cooling issues during summer months. We have had record summer heat waves year on year for the past decade, resulting in severe drought and hotter rivers. The cooling capacity of the rivers that cool the plants is getting closer and closer to the delta limit every year.

Your comment about ‘both sides’ getting behind nuclear is specifically a US issue. EU politics is far less binary.

Saying all of this. If you want to criticize subsidies. Criticize those fed to the automotive industry. In 2008 it was bailouts for US car manufacturers who were fiscally irresponsible. Following that, it was the extent the German government propped up VW/Audi before/during/after the emission scandale. Now it’s the push for electric cars, financed by subsidies and tax incentives. Take all of this money. Invest it in public transport infrastructure.

1