The head of the Australian energy market operator AEMO, Daniel Westerman, has rejected nuclear power as a way to replace Australia’s ageing coal-fired power stations, arguing that it is too slow and too expensive. In addition, baseload power sources are not competitive in a grid dominated by wind and solar energy anyway.
Who is suggesting solar alone?
Many people seem to think that’s the idea. I don’t know about you, but when you frame the discussion as solar vs nuclear, that is what you are suggesting.
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
I’m not sure if this is your first conversation on the topic but the debate is almost entirely on renewables vs nuclear.
Did you notice yourself using the word “solar” in this conversation rather than “renewables”?
Yes. I used renewables. But I used solar before because that was specifically the conversation. What a funny and irrelevant question.
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
Woosh…
Moves goalposts. Gets called on it. Acts like a dick. What a waste of space.
There are many other types of renewables than just solar.
Really? Wow! Thanks!
You are not arguing in good faith if you use exclusively solar in one sentence and then make sweeping generalisations about renewables in another. And yes, consider this a final warning from a mod of this community.