Il leader del Partito Verde critica i piani per il nuovo sito nucleare di Hartlepool
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98np768g92o
di Jared_Usbourne
Il leader del Partito Verde critica i piani per il nuovo sito nucleare di Hartlepool
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c98np768g92o
di Jared_Usbourne
21 commenti
The Greens really need to grow up if they have any serious aspirations. I quite like them under their new leader but this is stupid.
>Polanski said it was technology “from a long time ago” and that money would be better spent on wind and solar power, which could deliver thousands of jobs.
Easily one of the stupidest criticisms of nuclear power I’ve ever heard…
Imagine an environmentalist party that doesn’t care about the environment
of course they would. Their idiots when it comes to anything nuclear.
I like the Greens and support them, but nuclear isn’t the problem, nor is it the solution but a useful bridge between heavy polluting energy sources and fully renewable sources the tech and infrastructure isn’t there yet. nuclear buys us time.
Rare Zach misstep.
I’m really hoping people don’t vote for Greens just because of Farage. Like we have to think beyond Farage.
That’s a shame – I was hoping that he might start to soften their anti nuclear rhetoric.
Peak virtue signalling, left-wing purity tests leading to circular firing squads will always be what kills any left-wing movement gaining momentum.
These people would rather die than make a reasonable compromise.
Ah yes, like the greens in Germany.
They ended nuclear energy lived happily ever aft… what?
This is one of the reasons I just can’t back Greens. It’s so fucking stupid to be against nuclear in this day and age.
Why are the Greens so anti-nuclear? Is that the party line for other Green parties in Europe too?
This is why I cannot take the Green Party seriously. It’s a bunch of NIMBYs pretending to care about the environment.
Wonder if the usual crowd of Polanski fanboys will be along to defend this
Their anti nuclear power policy is probably the only thing that’s preventing me from voting for them. Do they realise that we need a stable source of always on power to provide a base load for the grid. Whilst they are great sources of clean energy Wind and Solar cannot provide a consistent stable base load. Not investing in nuclear will only lead to prolonged and possibly increased use of Gas.
Having said that though, I don’t know who else I would vote for. I can’t reasonable vote labour at the moment. The Lib Dems are a possibility it depends on their manifesto come election time. Your Party of whatever they’re called seemed doomed for failure due to their infighting (I know in fighting in a left wing party who’d have predicted it).
Their one weakness as a party is their anti nuclear stance. Both civil energy and deterrent
I get it that they’re green so almost gotta take that position but it’s their weakness
That and the ambiguity on NATO
Nuclear fission and fusion is the quickest route to getting off most fossil fuels while renewables build up
And we need NATO with how much of a armed threat Russia is to Europe
I’m torn on nuclear power. Looking at the state of everything else in this country it’s hard to trust it’d be run well enough to be safe
We need to join the greens and get rid of this stance and the silly anti trains thing
Show me a large economy that is primarily powered by wind & solar with cheap electricity and low co2 intensity.
France has cheap electricity and low co2 intensity and it’s primarily nuclear powered.
I don’t agree but the rest of their policy platform is good enough for me. Better than the other dress.
They just can’t help themselves..
We are not yet in a technological position and won’t be for decades to have our energy supplied solely by renewable energy.
The problem is not so much the lack of power generation but storage.
Renewable Power (Solar, Wind, Tidal etc..) is very good at generation but what it isn’t is stable.
To power a country you need a method of power generation that is stable that you can increase and decreased on demand.
You can not have a base power generation made from renewable energy as we do not yet have a way to store it on mass.
This means you have to have a base of Nuclear Power generation which is by better in every to that of Coal or Gas and then you supplement that with renewables.
The more renewables the less Nuclear but you will always need that stable base until such time we can mass store power.
Look at China, they are leading the world in renewable power generation in every single way yet they still are still building many brand new Nuclear Power Stations to replace all their Gas / Coal because you still need a stable base that is scalable on demand.
Nuclear power is the great litmus test to know if someone has a clue what they are talking about when it comes to energy policy.
Unsurprisingly, the hypnotist who tries to help women visualise having bigger breasts doesn’t know anything about energy policy.