Stoneykins [any] @ Stoneykins @mander.xyz

Posts

0

Comments

320

Joined

2 yr. ago

I just needed a phrase to refer to the group of people that really, really liked nuclear power, and only wanted nuclear power to be the solution to fossil fuels, and were pretty rude to anyone who disagreed with them about this. "Nuclear Stan" seemed accurate to that, and I didn't mean it as an insult, just a description of their position on the issue.

So why does it bother you? I'm not trying to be rude.

Ah, the specifc numbers, 80%/20%, or 90%/10%, I'm not sure we exactly agree on, but hypothetical future specifics like that aren't productive to argue about, I'm sure it will be solved by practicality at the time it becomes relevant.

But also important, and I should have said something about it before, battery and other power storage method technology is also getting cheaper and more effective, faster and faster. 2023 battery tech is better than 2022 battery tech and 2024 battery tech will be better yet, all by noticeable margins. It doesn't really concern me, they get better faster than we can build them. And we are getting more efficient at recycling the rare materials too, we aren't far from it being cheaper to recycle a battery than mine new rare materials.

Hi! Your information is outdated and we very much have the technology necessary to meet energy demand with renewables.

I agree with this. I like nuclear, I think it's neat, but I think it will be a minor player in solving climate change and meeting energy demands (unless there is some miracle breakthrough in fusion). It is perfect for specific locations/contexts.

I'm just bothered by:

People who think nuclear everywhere is the only possible solution to getting off fossil fuels, and have unrealistic expectations about its ease of building and price

and

People who trash talk solar and wind while being wholly uninformed about how effective and cheap those things are, and how fast they are getting cheaper and more effective.

For some reason, these people are often the same people.

I remember how I felt about antivaxxers a decade ago. Drove me crazy, people making bad sweeping decisions based on gut feeling and fear instead of trying to understand the medicine and how it benefited them. I often tried pretty hard to convince the ones I knew personally to reconsider.

Nowadays I just try not to get yelled at for my opinions while I watch things fall apart.

"stan" is a common word for excessive fanatic. It isn't always purely an insult. I also was specifically referring to people that were pretty rude in their behavior before. Feel free to assume I'm not talking about you, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with people who like nuclear.

Think of me as a solar stan if it makes things simpler

Yes my political opponents are the people I disagree with. I don't see your point here.

Fixing our energy demands so they stop fucking the planet doesn't require us to hold hands and sing together, we just have to invest in the proper energy infrastructure. Arguing about what energy infrastructure is proper is a good way to make sure we are looking at all sides of this.

Edit: man, quiet downvotes annoy me. Please, let me know what I said that drew your ire so I can determine whether I've made an ass of myself or if we just don't agree.

I don't suppose anyone has made something like a lemmy equivalent of removeddit or the like?

Something that grabs modlogs and now hidden comments directly from people's profiles to put removed stuff back in context?

I remember so many nuclear stans on lemmy a bit ago refusing to acknowledge that renewables are getting so good and cheap that they are more important to solving climate change than nuclear. I wonder how they feel seeing investors pull out in favor of renewables?

Probably just the instances you browse from tbh

Npc, or "non player character"

For when you want to pretend people who disagree with you don't have complex inner lives, and are just autonomous husks. Dehumanizing imo

I really think we need to get there closer to 2030, maybe 2035, but seriously it is nice to see any plan that doesn't think 2050 is fine

You trying to lead them by the nose to a sane position/definition for genocide, and them just being intentionally obtuse, basically saying "nu-uh" over and over...

Painful to read. Kinda frustrating to see a moderator behave that way. I appreciate your effort though.

Np

Honestly its just when asking questions about the political beliefs people hold close to their identity, especially on forums where they are already defensive, you have to do the work to phrase your questions in particular ways that don't make anyone feel as though they are being disagreed with. If they feel like they are talking to a political opponent, they don't feel motivated to answer well, or answer.

I mean, you can do whatever you want, but I've found you can't get decent answers in places like this unless you do the emotional labor to make the people you are speaking to feel comfortable.

I can tell, 70 comments in the 3 hours your account has existed lol

I mean I don't really care about the topic you are speaking about

But I am bored

I can't tell why you commented on a day old comment to start an argument with someone who doesn't really care that much.

I can't tell if you are just angry and on a weird internet tantrum or a communist who made this account to do a bit

I think you kinda missed my point. Sure, socialists and communists don't like tankies, but conservatives think the socialists and communists who don't like tankies are tankies. They aren't "unified against tankies", they don't agree who, what, and where "tankies" are.