TIL that the fossil fuel propagandists have picked a new slur for renewable energy sources, which is "ephemeral power". :blobcatglare:
-
TIL that the fossil fuel propagandists have picked a new slur for renewable energy sources, which is "ephemeral power". :blobcatglare:
-
La Ursidinoj (Bjornsdottirs)replied to Riley S. Faelan last edited by
@riley je fek? ĉu vere? bizare! sendu ligilon pri tio?
-
@riley which is particularly ironic when you consider that renewable energy is here to stay for the next 4 or 5 billion years, while any other source of energy is going to be wiped out in the next couple hundred years at the current rate of consumption.
-
@oblomov Well, we should have enough thorium for a couple millennia at the current consumption rate, and once controlled fusion will be a thing, we have even more fusion fuel than that.
-
La Ursidinoj (Bjornsdottirs)replied to Riley S. Faelan last edited by
@riley Ŝajne temas pri atomkerna energio kiel la ne-efemera energifonto
-
Riley S. Faelanreplied to La Ursidinoj (Bjornsdottirs) last edited by
@ellenor2000 No, look at the sources. (This is why I linked at a search engine, not a single article. You get a quick glance of how the talking point has been moving around. It's right-wing sources and oil-gas-and-coal fanboys. Which strongly overlap.) They're just obfuscating their oil affinity by specifically targetting Germany, where they consider nuclear power to have been defeated, so when they take on their next biggest enemies, wind and sunshine, they get to pretend to be pro-nuclear without anything pro-nuclear coming out of it.
Also, while some versions do a slightly better job at hiding it than others, all the instances I've seen so far hype "renewables bad", not "nuclear good". They pretend to yearn for the past nuclear power, but don't propose building new nuclear plants.