Can we make the ecological transition without nuclear power?

[humus]

The real question is:Can we make the energy transition without oil?
Nuclear power accounts for 16% of our energy (France) and barely 5% in the world, so this is a bad question.

Well, no, it's not a bad question since the transition is implicitly without oil.
Without nuclear power, that's more.
It could have been asked: the transition than with renewable energies?

[humus]

I did not know that nuclear power was simply part of an option in the plan energetic transition... since it is a mining energy therefore fossil and exhaustible ...

Wind turbine manufacturing also consumes a lot of fossil fuel. Not to mention recycling ...
I have a little trouble understanding what this is about renewable energy.

And nobody wants a windmill in their garden, me the premirr.

The question now comes down to a Can we make the energy transition with solar, hydraulics, biomass and geothermal energy?

[Christophe]

I did not know that nuclear power was simply part of an option in the plan energetic transition... since it is a mining energy therefore fossil and exhaustible ...

Wind turbine manufacturing also consumes a lot of fossil fuel. Not to mention recycling ...
I have a little trouble understanding what this is about renewable energy.

Except that it is "profitable" from a certain number of turns For solar PV we say that it is within 2 years ... so there are more than 20 years left over the lifespan of ecological profitability ...

Any crafted item consumes more or less fossil! Some are profitable others never ... where is the ecological profitability and particularly fossil, for example, of a thermal car?

A mine that runs out is never "profitable for ecology" even if for capitalism there is no better level of profitability!

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

If it's recyclable, who cares?

[phil59]

If it's recyclable, who cares?

Usually, to recycle, we consume energy.

Extending the lifespan, "of any device", without relentlessness, however, is undoubtedly better.

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

If it's recyclable, who cares?

Usually, to recycle, we consume energy.

Extending the lifespan, "of any device", without relentlessness, however, is undoubtedly better.

It's true, you're right, long live the disposable, but of quality.

[Christophe]

If it's recyclable, who cares?

Bin no ... gray fossil energy is lost forever!

The bobos liners are a good example ... it's recycled and it's an ecological disaster ... up and down and across!

It is profitable for what, for whom, tourism? Ah yes we want profitability on renewable energies but we never talk about other sectors of activity which by nature will NEVER be profitable (quite the opposite)!

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

I'm not talking about profitability, I'm not talking about utility, I'm talking about recyclable, recycled, recycle. If we had recycled all the plastic shit we produced, we wouldn't be here (this is an example). Otherwise, go and recycle a nuclear power plant, let's laugh.

[Christophe]

I did not know that nuclear power was simply part of an option in the plan energetic transition... since it is a mining energy therefore fossil and exhaustible ...

But present everywhere on land and at sea and above all does not release GEZ by "burning". RTE included it in its plan

All over the world? Everywhere at sea? Are you talking about waste there or fuskushima?

Well it's not a good idea to include it ...

ps: Izy invents the Zerre effect? Germanic origins maybe?

[Christophe]

Otherwise, go and recycle a nuclear power plant, let's laugh.

But what are you talking about here? Perdro, abc and izy will tell you that it's izy (easy = easy) !! In addition it makes long-term employment without having to manage the worries of pensions (on the contrary it solves it!)

The dismantling of a nuclear power station is an economic orgasm for any "self-respecting" politician!

Chooz They've been on it for 30 years ... they haven't yet seen the beginning of the end ... the beginning!