• jonne
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s super destructive to the ecology of waterways though.

    • Iceblade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Climate change is also super destructive to the ecology of waterways - and also to everything else, so I’m gonna say sacrificing a few fish for the good of the rest of the fish is probably a good idea.

      • jonne
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Same issue as nuclear though, building a dam takes years, time we don’t really have.

        • Iceblade@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Sure, the best time to start building more hydro/nuclear was 10 years ago, but I’ll bet that we will still be using fossil fuels in 10-15 years at this rate, so the second best time to start building is today.

          We need to be building all kinds of clean energy production everywhere all at once - we can’t afford not to.

        • SolarMech@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Sure, we are terribly behind schedule and will take losses for it (in what form I do not know, but for sure it won’t be pretty).

          But we need more and more energy and will need more, and even that growth in that graphic is not enough to prevent fossil fuel use from growing. At least until people wisen up that we’ll just need to learn to make do with less energy per capita… I’m not convinced that part will ever happen.

          Not to mention I’m not sure how much wind and solar you can do at the same time in the world. At some point everyone will need the same materials…