In a recent study, researchers from the European Environmental Bureau (EEB), the Stockholm School of Economics (SSE), and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) questioned the planned development of new nuclear capacities in the energy strategies of the United States and certain European countries.
  • TWeaK@lemm.eeEnglish
    142·
    1 year ago

    However, the researchers show that in terms of cost and speed, renewable energy sources have already beaten nuclear and that each investment in new nuclear plants delays decarbonization compared to investments in renewable energies. “In a decarbonizing world, delays increase CO2 emissions,” the researchers pointed out.

    They talk about profit to get the attention of money people, but the ultimate goal is decarbonization. Hell, the title of the source article is “Why investing in new nuclear plants is bad for the climate”.

    • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.worldEnglish
      21·
      1 year ago

      Two of the researchers are economists, and the third is an environmental economist. I’d rather get my opinions on decarbonization and nuclear energy from actual scientists and people who run research reactors.

      It’s just money people talking to money people. I don’t trust an economist to make a value judgment on science when all they’re looking at is profit. I actually actively distrust them. They’re interested in investments and profit – nuclear has an undeserved stigma and it makes its profit in the long term, not the short term that they all seem to love.