“not in a highly refined form”

Not in a highly refined form

Moves goalposts. Gets called on it. Acts like a dick. What a waste of space.

Irrelevant to storing nuclear waste for 10000 years, which was what I was talking avout

FFS if you can’t see that changing the topic of conversation effects the meaning of people’s responses then I don’t know what to tell you. I’m done here

Yeah, that’s hardly going to be a global solution. But whatevs this discussion is devolving into the rediculous

Except you have no emperical basis for judging the accuracy of those odds.

Did you notice yourself using the word “solar” in this conversation rather than “renewables”?

I mean, it’s fair to compare the two techs but that’s different from suggesting that you need a single approach to generation. No one is seriously suggesting that only solar for generation is sensible

Care to point them out? The fact all our crops would die is a big one

Literally no sun for years would mean no crops which means everyone and all their animals would be dead

You stated that all nuclear a accidents were the fault of lax standards. I gave you a counter example.

If you’re talking about an extinction level event like that which caused the death of the dinosaurs then I think we have bigger problems.

It’s all very well claiming that nuclear waste storage is safe but you can’t guarantee anything can be kept safe for 10000 years. Humans haven’t managed that for anything, ever.

Who is suggesting solar alone?

Japan has high safety standards

I’m not sure what kind of sudden weather event covers all the sun for Australia. Seems a little farcical

We have an edge made with weed mat which we can mown over so the mower can do it all

Which “this”? Capitalism or degrowth?