this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2024
105 points (71.6% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

6303 readers
236 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.


If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)


  • If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS


Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.


Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...


Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.


This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nacktmull@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (5 children)

Bullshit, nuclear waste is incredibly toxic.

[–] PwnTra1n@lemmy.world 16 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah it’s a good thing we have clean burning gas and coal

[–] Nacktmull@lemmy.world -1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

There is this crazy new trend called renewables. Also, please quote the part where I supported fossil fuels.

[–] revelrous@sopuli.xyz 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's not as toxic as coal. It is only that you are used to those effects. It's also a safer industry to work in. Technically safer even than wind and solar last I looked. I wouldn't treat it as a permanent solution. But it could keep the lights on while we pivot to renewables.

[–] Nacktmull@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I wouldn’t treat it as a permanent solution. But it could keep the lights on while we pivot to renewables.

Agreed, that´s the compromise I would propose too.

[–] revelrous@sopuli.xyz 1 points 8 months ago

I know some people in nuclear power and get in arguments with them all the time about this. (they're not big fans of renewables. shocker.) But they're right that renewables just aren't ready to take over yet. Where I'd say we need to fund renewable research and development—they are deadset it's a waste of money. But fossil fuels have got to go. I think it'd be for the best if no one was ever comfortable with nuclear but I just don't see another alternative that works with how quickly we are killing the planet. 🤷‍♂️

[–] Tayb@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] amzd@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Burning coal creates more radioactive waste but with nuclear power it’s contained instead of combusted into the air we breathe.

Still not a fan of nuclear, mainly because I think it takes quite long to build compared to the timeframe we have for fixing climate change, although I’ve seen some articles that it’s supposed to be faster now than the past 10 years.

[–] Nacktmull@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

Burning coal creates more radioactive waste but with nuclear power it’s contained instead of combusted into the air we breathe.

Fortunately, opposing nuclear power does not mean supporting fossil fuels.

Still not a fan of nuclear, mainly because I think it takes quite long to build compared to the timeframe we have for fixing climate change

Agreed, that is another good argument against nuklear.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You drank the Kool-aid and asked for seconds didn't you?

It's impressive to see the massive power of oil-industry-paid propaganda.

[–] Nacktmull@lemmy.world -5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Please quote the part where I supported fossil fuels. I am pro renewables, not pro fossil.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I never said you supported fossil fuels. Please point to the part where I said or implied such a thing.

I'm affirming that the notion that “nuclear waste is incredibly toxic” is false and it's a propaganda piece that was inserted into popular culture by the oil industry who paid to make the idea mainstream. Nuclear waste is not inherently any more toxic than standing outside under the sun. But you repeated that because you were brainwashed by the propaganda, that the oil industry paid for to disseminate in pop culture.

[–] Nacktmull@lemmy.world -4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Nuclear waste is not inherently any more toxic than standing outside under the sun.

Nuclear waste contains Plutonium and that is only one of several highly toxic substances it contains. Are you seriously trying to tell me Plutonium is not extremely toxic?

But you repeated that because you were brainwashed by the propaganda, that the oil industry paid for to disseminate in pop culture.

Both, the nuclear and the fossil lobby have spread disinformation systematically, you are a good example for the pro nuclear propaganda. I on the other hand reject both, fossil and nuclear because both are harmful.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

There's a qualitative difference between the fact “Plutonium is toxic“ and the propaganda piece “nuclear waste is toxic”. The first is an statement of truth about a chemical element, the second is an attempt to halt rational thinking. Nuclear waste is depleted fuel encased in concrete. You can stand next to it without any ill consequence to your health and it is not toxic. Unless you actively try to break into it, you won't be harmed anymore than standing under the sun.

But seeing the way you reacted to some other person showing evidence, with the construction of an ugly ad-hominem attack and the equivalent of a child sticking fingers in their ears and singing. I would not be wasting any more electricity on you. You say pro-nuclear propaganda, as if both positive and negative propaganda aren't nuances to take into account. That truth can lie at the core of propaganda, and that the best propaganda is the one that doesn't have to lie to make its point. While still regurgitating and supporting negative propaganda based on scientific falsehoods that goes against your own self-proclaimed principles and goals.

[–] spujb@lemmy.cafe 1 points 8 months ago

Excellent and well written counter. 👍