Renewables require deforestation

I'd be for Nuclear Fusion if they had it perfected. Considering that a single mishap can contaminate the entire surrounding area for thousands of years, it's a big risk.

germany has 2 huge ones i think

Nuclear power requires little to no deforestation

Its expensive, but i think its the future. Most of this "green" energy isnt sustainable or reliable, but Nuclear energy is much cleaner than coal, and many times more reliable and sustainable than green solutions.

Yeah but the USA is bigger than all of the EU

yup

Exactly @Wardog

@IncompetentGeneral how about chernobyl

Meaning we have more money rocket

Forests can be sustainably harvested. Just look at the paper industry.

Fusion is actually still hypothetical, we have yet to achieve proper ignition

how expensive are we talking ?

Pfft Chernobyl

Of course, just because its better doesnt mean we can just switch over to it like that, but over time we need too

We wouldn’t be able to go full nueclear

That was a mistake on that part

It cost too much

hillary did chernobyl btw

Hillary is Chernobyl

The Soviets were careless with that technology and didn’t prepare for that

**Hangs himself**

Nuclear energy is the way to go.

That Hitlery @DθGΣΉ

trying to say Chernobyl is a good argument against Nuclear Energy is stupid

Welcome, <@!726947163115880589>.

While yes but it’s hella expensive

i just watched zero dark thirty

We have better tech now since Chernobyl

Especially for a country larger than the EU

and was doing some research on al qaeda

Yes

Preventing meltdowns

High up front cost, yes, but the operating cost and efficiency are off the CHARTS

But cost bro

^

Cost

its a long term investment as well.

and i realized that i mightve been a bit too free with my google searches

uh oh lol

im pretty sure my government is watching me