EU court rules nuclear energy is clean energy

You know what, let’s turn popular city parks to windmill and solarparks. NY central park for example. Copenhagen has a few beloved open green places we could clean out and replace with solarcells, so does Berlin.

Im unscientifically guessing support for nc energy would rise very quickly and wed have a whole bunch of them within a decade.

Source, I live near a windmill, they are loud as f*k. I drive by solaparks nearly every day.

They remind me of those horrible deforested areas in Sweden called kalhygge. Nothing green about those atrocities.

Newer wind turbines don't have a gearbox and are almost completely silent. When standing next to one, the loudest components are the electrical inverters/transformers.

Wings are loud

You are sarcastic, but seriously I sometimes have an impression that people are so invested in the slogan of green energy that they would be fine with cutting down last tree on this planet to put a solar panel in its place, while believing they save the planet and environment.

Yeah have seen them. Down south of EU, in Portugal, they are buying land used for agriculture for these huge solar farms. And it is as sad as it is here. Surely, food is more important no? If they were placed in some deserts like in Spain... maybe they make sense, but these are very arable lands.

Wind is yeah... a whole other beast, although I do like what they have done in the Baltic and North seas.

I don't doubt your experience but this is not at all mine. I live by, cycle by, and work by windmills and there is no notable noise from any of them, even the older ones don't make a noise that I'd hear through a wall.

And the argument you make against PV is absurd, no one suggests that that's the way to use PV. Where I live everyone has PV on their roofs to produce mostly for own consumption. There are also many concepts to use it on otherwise unused spaces more at scale (office buildings and train stations for example, but also in combination with greenhouses, as roof for farm areas, ...

Yes you can do both of them badly but nuclear takes a huge space and makes it unusable for generations, and in addition requires vast infrastructure to actually get the energy safely into the grid. I'm a fan of nuclear power, but the arguments you make renewables are neither actual arguments pro nuclear nor do they seem to me to hold much water.

Seems like an economics problem? Is farmland cheaper than buying some otherwise less usable land? Or is there now much land available and a huge unmet energy need? And there are also models to use solar that still allow some farming below (e.g. strawberry, beans, greenhouses, ... But maybe not cost effective in this case, or the incentives don't align well.

Have you looked into why this model is chosen?

Why would you turn green space into solar farms when there are hideous and heat island creating parking lots right there?

Agrivoltaics (dual use of land for solar energy and agriculture) is gaining ground in many nations. This is heavy industry, the pace is slower than in most sectors (IT...).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrivoltaics

It's funny how you're proposing this in bad faith as a terrible idea having tried to think of the worst place you could possibly put these things.

And yet we've done it, and everyone around it likes it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExPlace_Wind_Turbine#/media/Fi...

It's not particularly practical of course, because the real estate is expensive and the tall things in a city all fuck with the airflow... but then that's why this is a publicity stunt and not where we usually put them.

We have wind turbines in the north of Germany, close to cities, it’s a non-issue

Oil is so green. Oil spills are so beautiful.

Yes, its sarcasm.

The EU as a whole has a pretty large oversupply of food, so using arable land for other things than agriculture is no big deal.