Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)OR
OriginalUsername @ OriginalUsername @lemmy.world
Posts
0
Comments
8
Joined
2 yr. ago

They use to tell us we couldnt trust Wikipedia. Now we know. Wikipedia is the only website you can trust.

Jump

  • Huh?

    • How do you call someone born in the US besides "American"?

    Jump

  • "someone born in the US"

    • Australia rejects proposal to recognise Aboriginal people in constitution

    Jump

  • What the fuck are you on about

    • incredible

    Jump

  • You spin the turbine, duh

    • Young climate activist tells Greenpeace to drop ‘old-fashioned’ anti-nuclear stance

    Jump

  • Yeah nah, no one is saying that. What people are saying is that neither is fundamentally better than the other, and usage should depend on geographic conditions, sociopolitical considerations, materials and experience. Moreover, while both are not receiving sufficient investment and development, Nuclear in particular receives unwarranted opposition and remains unable to advance due to a lack of funding and support

    • Swedish government removes nuclear power promise from website

    Jump

  • A few errors

    • 130TWh is the final electricity consumption, not the generation. Since Sweden is a big net exporter of electricity, there is a big difference
    • I'm not sure what macrotrends refers to by "Fossil fuel consumption", but it's pobably referring to raw energy rather than electricity (which doesnt consider conversion efficiency)
    • In reality, sweden uses almost no fossil fuels in its electricity mix, and that is in large part due to nuclear
    • KWh and KW, not KW and KW/h
    • In your calculations you failed to account for capacity factors. Wind plants have average capacity factors of about 42% in sweden, so the capacity would need to be over double the consumption, even ignoring the variability of consumption and production

    Nevertheless, I do agree that Sweden doesn't need more nuclear. It already generates some of the cleanest electricity in the world and I'd imagine fossil fuels are really only used for peak load.

    • Young climate activist tells Greenpeace to drop ‘old-fashioned’ anti-nuclear stance

    Jump

  • Mercury will always be with us. Arsenic will always be with us. PFAS will always be with us. Natural radiation will always be with us. Fortunately, nuclear waste is easily detectable, the regulations around it are much stronger, the amount of HLW is miniscule and the storage processes are incredibly advanced

    Moreover, most Nuclear waste won't always be with us. A lot of fission prodcuts have half lives in the decades or centuries

    • in Australia, when we pay taxes, we get a receipt. The receipt shows what our taxes were spent on

    Jump

  • "correctly"