this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2023
59 points (95.4% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35393 readers
1 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Seeing that they need quite a lot of clean water, which is not widely available everywhere during the entire year in big amounts, especially with these droughts due to climate change.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

True but In 2023 the alternatives are not nuclear vs coal, but nuclear vs wind and solar. The fallout for each accident is immense. Western Europe dealt with Tschernobyl for years. Japan was just lucky that the wind blew in the other direction.

If the world triples nuclear power plants, and we deal with an accident every 7-10 years, that’s gonna be a serious problem, even if it is “just” country sized areas that become unfarmable or so.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Pitting nuclear against wind and solar is stupid given how much they compliment each other.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

A study from 1989 doesn't apply to modern plants built 35 years later, it really doesn't make sense to extrapolate it like this.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

While true, the study obviously underestimated the evidence we gathered in the real world. It's not simple to handle numbers with many 0 behind them, therefore it's good to have multiple approaches.

[–] jasory 1 points 10 months ago

"Dealt with Chernobyl for years..."

You realise that all the estimated premature deaths are less than respiratory issues from air pollution. We could have a Chernobyl every year and it would be an improvement.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

We can not have clean emergy because coal miners have to mine coal.

If they don't mine that coal then the whole thing falls apart.