As someone from Texas I understand the feeling lol
1 Like
Lol TX is crazy
Lots of people move there from CA though! Much cheaper
When you factor that some of the electricity for battery EVās comes from nuclear plants, they arenāt necessarily better for the environment than internal combustion cars, today.
Nuclear plants are more clean than coal
5 Likes
Was about to comment the same thingā¦
Nuclear plants are dirty in different ways, and right now greenhouse gases are the most urgent problem. We actually need more nuclear and wind and solar and hydro.
And more density of populations.
4 Likes
Iām very interested in wave power, it seems like a cool option
1 Like
If you look at how much Cs137 is in 5 years of spent fuel from 1 large reactor its only 150kgā but unfortunately thatās twice as much as is necessary to render a UK sized area uninhabitable via mandatory evacuations, for a period of time which is greater than 30 years. The spent fuel is kept in flimsy buildings clad in flammable metal. You can only say that there is X% probability it wonāt all be released to the environment in a single event, such as an attack by terrorists with militarized drones or a hypersonic conventional strike.
Youāre right, we could just destroy the whole planet to keep that one area safe 
1 Like
Iāll quote someone from a different forum:
ā So for a 25kWh car charging today in the UK, with 5kWh coming from nuclear, charging that car produces enough Cs137 and Sr90 to contaminate 4,500m^2.
The total mass of air over 4,500m^2 is 45,000 tonnes of air, so adding 5.5kg.CO2 would increase the CO2 concentration in that column by ~0.12ppm.
What is the responsible thing to do, today ?ā
Man honestly just fuck all cars. Not everyone needs a huge vehicle for 4-5 people and cargo unless theyāre on a long range trip with many people. Individualized transportation is the future.
We also need better batteries. The current status quo is not sustainable.
4 Likes
The distinction here is that nuclear could contaminate that amount of area and lead to problems, while pollution is already killing people. In 2017 air pollution was responsible for 5 million deaths, nearly 1 in 10, and the fact of the matter is a switch to nuclear from coal, which still comprises a quarter of all energy generated, would save lives. The waste can be buried underground until new technologies come around to process it, while we canāt bury deaths underground and revive them in the future.
5 Likes
Indeed it couldā¦
Are we making this a conspiracy thread now lol
Oh yeah the US has like 5000 warheads that could blow up the whole world and put into nuclear uninhabitability
6 Likes
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions ASAP.
2 Likes
Have you ever been to Europe? We have places to lock your bike up everywhere 
Itās literally never an issue, unlike trying to find a car parking space, lol
3 Likes
I have not unfortunately
Here itās maybe 25% chance or less that you could lock your bike somewhere
And then if you do, someone might steal a wheel if you donāt lock it right lol
2 Likes
I know people in this thread will complain about airplane emissions ā but you should visit! Most countries are very cheap to tour, and a lot of stuff might blow your mind. Like bicycle racks in trains for those who take their bike with them when commuting long distances 
Or just cities with insane public transport that is literally faster than traveling by car
2 Likes
And your seat, and your other wheel, bike thieves have tools too.
2 Likes
But which is worse for the environment? Contaminating 4500m^2 with 1MBq/m^2 Cs137 for 30 years or increasing the CO2 concentration in that same area by 0.1ppm? (Same distance driven in either case).
1 Like
Fuckers once stole my whole bike, donāt sell them short
1 Like