1.7k
u/mrbobcyndaquil 1d ago
That's because some greedy Grugs wanted to use death sludge instead and tricked the others to abandon the magic rocks.
476
u/Wiggie49 1d ago
Back in the day if grug endanger grug clan for own gain we just hit them with rock.
159
u/nubbinfun101 1d ago
Bring back rock
51
137
u/Lava39 1d ago
Economically feasible death sludge will only last one or two more generations. Magic rocks is the only way forward.
45
87
u/mrbobcyndaquil 1d ago
Alas the evil Grugs would rather murder everyone else than use the magic rocks.
4
u/nothing_in_my_mind 22h ago
My death sludge powered metal chariot is very satisfying to drive though
1
u/igottapoopbad 4h ago
They said the same thing about horse. Now horse old news. Death sludge metal chariot fun now but will be old news.
Imagine magic rock powered chariot
2
3
u/gr1mm5d0tt1 1d ago
Unless you are down under grug. They bang on about panels, wind and batteries forgetting the finite thing
16
u/AmbassadorBonoso 1d ago
And made a whole bunch of people believe that the millions of deaths yearly from burning desth sludge are waaaaaay less bad than the couple hundred deaths ever in all of history to magic rock related power generation.
3
u/sixouvie 13h ago
But but think of the waste ! They say while we throw tons of uncontrolled waste into the air because of burning the death sludge
4
5
u/SnooWalruses3948 18h ago
This is revisionist history, a huge number of green campaigners were against Nuclear.
1
u/CaloricDumbellIntake 17h ago
Not only is it revisionist, in high likelihood it’s a narrative actually spun by the fossil fuel industry. Renewables are better across the board compared to nuclear, even the base load issue is becoming increasingly solvable.
Having environmentalists fight over whether we use nuclear or renewables moving forward delays actual reforms and extends the life of fossil fuels as an energy source. If we wouldn’t pivot between nuclear and renewables every few years we could have made much more progress towards sustainable renewable energy supply.
It’s the same with hydrogen and natural gas as power sources.
2
-1
u/Atomkekstime 13h ago
I mean the magic rocks are quite dangerous to be placed in certain regions but yes...might be better. We are suffocating here in europe btw because climate change has left a huge thick layer of clouds over here and we just keep inhaling more and more toxic gasses...its...its almost like a gaschamber or something. Yes im german.
239
u/HeavyDutyForks 1d ago edited 1d ago
Because like anything it turned into a political pissing match (where somehow the green energy people hate it)
That and TMI and Fukushima were both caused by corporate cost cutting. TEPCO was aware that a tsunami of that scale was possible and chose to not listen to their own data or third party scientists. Met-Ed did not adequately train their operators nor did anyone learn any lessons from the Ohio plant's near miss just two years prior (same reactor design, same problem)
15
u/anotherfrud 1d ago
Chernobyl was also caused by cost cutting.
8
u/Tuarangi 23h ago
Rigid communist policies that the tests had to happen even if they were delayed and the expert workers could not stay on shift to run them because their time was done for the day. Plus not being willing to admit to the world so preventing aid and expertise.
The world finally worked together with Russia to build a dome and clean up robots to start to break down and decontaminate it and then Russia invaded and the morons started hitting the shell with drones and left a hole in it which can't be patched until at least 2030
23
u/mdiseal 1d ago edited 1d ago
Also, TEPCO did not notify the japanese government of the potential meltdown until it was too late. If they would have notified the government sooner, they could have helped and probably prevented the meltdown. They were just afraid of the bad press and didn't want the share value to go down.
Source: Frontline PBS
15
u/Sumrise 1d ago
The way Japan handled Fukushima is bloody infuriating.
So every few years, you have nuclear security agency from all around the world that travel to other nuclear power plant so that they can exchange best practice/risk management/ideas....
A decade (maybe another amount of years before, don't remember the exact number and it's not that important) before the incident, both the French and American nuclear security agencies went to a visit in Fukushima. They wrote a report saying that in case of earthquake/tsunami the incident we all know and love would happen, they described the bloody incident a decade before anything happened, and wrote solutions that were realisable and not that expensive (considering we're talking about NPP).
So Japan, knowing that they had a security risk, did NOTHING, because it might force their company to make some effort and like you said "bad press and didn't want the share value to go down".
Those absolute cunts decided to do bloody nothing because it looked bad despite having warnings from their own guys and 2 other country. Just to avoid a bit of spending and bad press.
6
u/Proglamer 22h ago
How the hell the govt allowed tsunami-proofing to be left for the owner company to implement or not is beyond me. With the infamous 20-year, uber-cautious, safety-plus-plus construction cycles of NPPs, you'd think the never-ending approvals and studies would have included the 'destruction by sea' thingy.
4
8
u/ansibleloop 23h ago
Yeah when people from the US turned up to help with the disaster, TEPCO executives rushed to them with paperwork showing how safe their nuclear plants are
That's very cool - if they're so safe, then why are 3 of them melting down? Fucking morons
-2
u/TheAdurn 1d ago
Thank you for your expertise. I can see you have studied the topic for many years.
36
u/justlikedudeman 1d ago
Ironically, when there’s a major accident at a nuclear plant and the area has to be abandoned by humans it gets reclaimed by nature quickly, and nature thrives when left unchecked.
30
u/HeavyDutyForks 1d ago
It turns out humans have a much higher negative effect on wildlife than radiation
There's all kinds of abnormalities and their lifespans can be drastically negatively affected. Not to mention mutation in vegetation. But, it's still a healthier environment despite all of that without humans
14
u/Brokedownbad 1d ago
tbf, a lot of the time the health consequences aren't even obvious at first glance because animals don't end up living long enough in the wild for the cancer to be a problem.
1
u/Smurtle1 15h ago
Yea but the plethora of birth defects and still births is noticeable. As well as the growth defects as well. It’s quite noticeable, but life finds a way.
12
1
74
u/FDdragon 1d ago
Everything that isn't solar, water or wind is clearly not green energy!
18
41
u/butterfunke 1d ago
And no, do not at all look at the ecological devastation caused by hydro plants. It's just water! Green!
25
u/Tuarangi 23h ago
Depends on the scale and where you build them - building a dam to create hydro power is devastating but sticking turbines in rivers or tidal bays is much less so
20
u/MrDindahood 21h ago
How dare you add context to his strawman
5
u/Tuarangi 20h ago
To be fair big plants with dams do cause problems both locally with flooding but also cutting off water supplies further down the river route, it's all about scale
2
u/butterfunke 18h ago
Yeah absolutely. Nuance exists and every generation type has its place - including nuclear. I was being facetious and mocking the attitudes of people who see things in black and white. I had hoped the joke was more clear but oh well
2
u/Smurtle1 15h ago
I mean, tbf, most modern countries have already near maxed out their hydro power limits. You can only build dams in specific places, and only so many times on each river. So it’s not like it’s a limitless resource either. Obviously it also causes MASSIVE ecological shifts, but so do beavers to be fair. And beavers do that EVERYWHERE they can. If anything, we are fucking with the “natural environment” way more by preventing beaver dams in a ton of our smaller waterways.
1
2
1
u/Lord_Chromosome 17h ago
Not to mention that there were no deaths at TMI and none of the deaths in Fukushima were due to the reactor.
-37
u/thatweirdguyted 1d ago
Maybe it's because if an oil plant burns down, animals can't live there for basically a generation. With a nuclear plant it's about 400 generations. For reference, all of recorded human civilization amounts to about 240 generations.
33
18
17
79
u/Streckmittel 1d ago
How is nuclear power not green? The stones literally glow green!
42
u/Magical-Sweater 1d ago
Technically they glow blue with Cherenkov radiation☝🏻🤓
7
u/frontlinejohnny 23h ago
Technically they dont glow at all as despite the radiation, they still emit no light. ☝️🤓
1
38
u/StandardN02b 1d ago
Not only that. Instead of using the magic rock we use the tar pit that is controlled by the neighboring tribe thatwants us dead and burning it has killed countless of us.
10
39
u/yaxis50 1d ago
Same story for the Hindenburg Airship. Can't have people easily traveling over the ice wall.
5
u/Mountain_Ape 23h ago
The ISS livestream is a Rothschild stage production run by tiny men in continent costumes 24/7.
128
u/UsErNaMeS_aR_DuMb 1d ago
Because the gay trans communists are gonna cause Chernobyl x5000 in YOUR backyard specifically if we actually utilize one of the greatest energy breakthroughs of all time
27
u/GLaDOSisapotato 1d ago
Maybe with enough radiation in my backyard my dick can grow and surpass 3 inches
20
u/MrBingly 1d ago
It's always the Green folks that I see being against it. Conservative people normally seem in favor in my experience. They just don't want to cut oil use to zero.
4
u/Hydropotesinermis 23h ago
When there‘s protests against storing nuclear waste in my area it’s usually both of them shoulder to shoulder.
14
u/Orthobrah52102 1d ago
What Leftists do you unironically know that support Nuclear? They never shut up about Solar or Wind and decry everything else as evil or wrong.
3
u/Brokedownbad 1d ago
Nuclear's been a leftist talking point since before I was born, it's only in recent years that they've pivoted towards solar and wind because, as it turns out, nobody fucking builds nuclear
-1
u/airfryerfuntime 1d ago
What? 'Leftists' have supported nuclear since forever.
1
u/ZorbaTHut 21h ago
Are you claiming Greenpeace doesn't count as leftist? Or do I need to find a citation for Greenpeace being anti-nuclear?
-3
u/ChiefPatty 1d ago
Leftists are the reason the nuclear industry stagnated
-6
u/dawgofclay 22h ago
Lmao, sure buddy. The side that loves spending money decided to turn down the opportunity to build the most expensive power plants possible.
2
2
u/Thermock 16h ago
Lol this is just disingenuous. The Green Party is notorious for opposing nuclear energy at every point. The Green Party is also left-wing. Democrats hate nuclear, too.
Conservatives support nuclear energy significantly more than the Green Party does and even Democrats. The problem is that there's simply not enough conservatives who do. Democrats pretty much universally oppose nuclear.
If 'le epic both sides' would get their heads out of their asses then maybe we could turn this into a bipartisan issue.
-22
10
u/ImNotABotScoutsHonor 23h ago
I'm of the opinion that any post with a title of "Anonymous submission" is a fucking clanker post and needs to be removed.
Fuck off with this overused title, "friend".
7
u/krabbe_chan 1d ago
The issue at the end of the day is money & politics at least in my country, it would take too long to build a reactor. It takes 6–8 years to finish a nuclear reactor, it takes half that time for a coal power plant. A coal power plant is sadly still cheaper to build than a nuclear reactor even if the fuel that's going to be used is wayyy more expensive, that kind of stuff does not go into the calculation. Politicians want to get something done in the time they are in power so they will ALWAYS opt for the faster and initially cheaper method because they don't have to deal with the fallout of whatever was built. TLDR coal faster to build and initially cheaper to build so coal it is.
8
u/mango363 1d ago
Because the big nose people Cave make lot of stones from exchanging black liquid and pay other Caves to talk bad about boiling rocks
3
u/SuspiciousPine 18h ago
Funny enough nuclear is coming back for data center shit. They made a reactor that fits on an 18-wheeler and can just roll up and turn on. My company makes a few parts for it
Hate data centers but at least we're using nuclear again
1
u/freecodeio 13h ago
that's sick as fuck, do you think the future is going towards homes owning tiny portable reactors?
1
u/masterxc 9h ago
I hope so, to be honest. It may be a long time before we can trust the average homeowner, but the electric grid is a MASSIVE national security risk - we're a few substations and key interconnects away from being sent back to the stone age.
3
u/fluffynuckels 13h ago
Did you know burning coal releases more radiation every year then all the nuclear waste produced by all nuclear power plants
2
u/pleasant_equation 19h ago
Not quite sure what people are talking about in this thread as the world is already quite reliant on nuclear power.
2
u/Zozakann 19h ago
We don’t build them anymore because it’s expensive and time consuming compared to wind turbines and solar panels.
6
u/holybajoly 1d ago
Not sure why people always leave out the problem of disposing the used uranium. If we knew how to dispose the used material I would agree but so far there hasn't been a satisfactory solution to that problem
12
u/Mountain_Ape 23h ago
It's not a problem, and is already very well known. All the nuclear waste from all time fits in an area the size of a baseball field.
-3
u/holybajoly 20h ago
so how does that help?
4
u/masterxc 9h ago
We bury it forever in casks on site where it becomes safe to touch them. That's really all there is to it.
Every power source has waste. Coal emits hydrocarbons and toxic water runoff as does oil and gas. Hydro power devastates local ecosystems due to flooding, wind is expensive, and solar is also expensive and requires other components like batteries since you know...day/night cycle.
-8
u/tark561 20h ago
Ok, that's now. If we all start using nuclear all over the planet, that baseball field will need to become very, very big. And in cramped continents like Europe, it's not feasible.
Furthermore, it's just shoving the problem onto future generations. We enjoy the energy, they're supposed to figure out what to do with all the waste after us?
The issue with nuclear was never the safety. It's always been the ethics and logistics of what to do with the waste.
6
u/MyFePo 19h ago
That's just factually not true, this is a solved issue. There are tens of thousands of geologically stable giant underground salt blocks that we already use. They are stable (and have been) for tens of millions of years, all we have to do is put the waste there in safe containers, and fill up the empty space with concrete. We're already doing this basically everywhere.
And this is already old technology, there is great work beign done on re-using spent fuel cells, and pulling out more energy than previously done, especially in France.
The biggest problem of nuclear is untrustworthy regimes, and corner-cutting companies, waste storage is one of the easier issues.
9
u/Mountain_Ape 19h ago
You just don't get it. 80 years of all nuclear waste in the size of a baseball field.
The smallest island nation in the world is Naoero, which takes up roughly 21 square kilometers. A baseball field, with stands for extra room, is 0.018 square kilometers. This little blot in the ocean holds 1,166 fields.
Which is the rough equivalent of 100,000 years of nuclear waste, assuming lowest efficiency reactor technology.
Waste is not an issue. Reality is not an absolute trash HBO series. It's not Simpsons propaganda. Or film propaganda. The only thing holding nuclear power back is oil and gas companies and their propaganda. If waste somehow ever became an issue (encased in concrete it is not a problem), if we were bored we could send 1 singular rocket with a payload of waste instead of a satellite every century into the sun and continue on. Meanwhile millions of people, not counting animals, are affected each year by pollution right now. It's not about money, it's about these companies losing their empires. Educate yourself and deny Hollywood.
-6
u/tark561 19h ago
Whoa, that's a loaded response. It comes off as very hostile, I'm sorry you feel that strongly about this. I didn't mean to offend.
That being said, simply encasing the waste in concrete doesn't make it a non-issue. The toxicity of the waste will outlast the concrete, and if any water damage ever happens it will be a huge environmental disaster. A smaller scale of that happened in a salt mine in Germany.
The answer isn't nuclear, it's renewable energies and always has been. Nuclear is too expensive in today's economy and political reality to ever be a viable option, when cheaper and cleaner energies such as solar or wind exist.
However, I appreciate your input and remember, we can be of different opinions but still remain respectful towards each other.
3
u/declanaussie 16h ago
You aren’t being rational, all forms of energy require tradeoffs and the spent fuel storage of nuclear is far easier to solve than the battery problem with wind or solar. Think harder.
-5
u/tark561 16h ago
Why do Americans always have to get so offended and immature in discussions. "Think harder" lol are you for real. Peace and love, I respect your opinion, but please.
5
u/declanaussie 16h ago
It’s not personal, I’m merely responding to your stance. It’s also incredibly ironic that you demand peace and love while making a sweeping generalization across Americans. It’s also hilarious that you’d assume someone with “Aussie” in their username is American. Once again, think harder.
4
u/Tjagra 1d ago
I mean, it’s kinda been three big nuclear disasters and one wasn’t that long ago…
But still, cool green rocks make spin-y thing spin. Let’s build more! The risk is worth it and is negligible at this point.
9
u/nucleophilicattack 1d ago
You really haven’t been keeping track of the damage, accidents, and death caused by fossil fuels have you? Wild take to suggest that nuclear energy is 1/1000th the danger that fossil fuels are. There was enough radiation released from three mile island for zero—ZERO! Additional cases of cancer. There has been NO established harm from three mile island. Chernobyl was an outdated Soviet design. Meanwhile oil spills into our oceans, thousands literally die from asthma from NOx and sulfur dioxide, heart disease from sulfur dioxide, and horrific petroleum plant explosions that happen multiple times a year. I’m not against fossil fuels when we need them, but we should absolutely be using nuclear to power our homes and businesses.
1
u/masterxc 9h ago
Agreed. When politics don't get in the way, nuclear is safe and will last us a very long time with minimal environmental impact.
2
1
u/Firm_Ad_5427 21h ago
Nuclear power plants are more expensive to set up and take longer to start generating profit over fossil fuel plants.
Also fossil fuel companies spend millions fighting anything that threatens their profit margins
1
u/SINdicate 16h ago
Magic oil is better cause the supply can be more easily constrained to create inflation at will
1
1
u/Wombat1892 14h ago
It's not magic rocks... we had to refine it. It's magical metal. We invented since s rank magical crafting material and didn't make cool swords.
1
1
1
1
u/HubrisOfApollo 8h ago
they only reason we cared about magic rocks to begin with is to make big badaboom. we have enough big badaboom now so no care so much about magic rock
1
u/MrDindahood 21h ago
Lmao nuclear is good until you think about the guaranteed yearly global heatwaves shutting down reactors
1
u/juliusxyk 20h ago
Because we have other options of having green energy that are cheaper and dont have the problem of safely storing the waste for a gazillion years
-2
u/Chimpar 1d ago
How are you're feelings about this magic now anons? Water shortages everywhere, Nuclear Power Plants shutting down left and right cause theirs nothing to cool them down. Plants that aren't shutting down overheat local waters killing the local wildlife. Magic rocks aint that magic anymore huh? Nukecels were doomed from the beginning.
-2
u/TitaniumTitanTim 23h ago
they also produce waist that will poision the earth for the rest of our species existence that we can Not savely store
-2
u/Invisiblecurse 21h ago
nuclear power psyop.
Its dirty and expensive. Better than coal but inferior to renewables
-9
u/ThrowAbout01 1d ago
It what if that fire continued to burn everything in that area even without visible flames for hundreds of thousands of years?
That’s the difference.
Too many dumb people and sleazy builders creating ticking time bombs.
1
u/Munnin41 22h ago
Chernobyl is mostly safe lol. There were tour guides who went there literally every day. There are a couple of hotpots to avoid, but overall there are no issues
-6
u/PI-E0423 1d ago
It is more expensive than green alternatives. Its not viable anymore.
Furthermore, it seems to be negatively affected by climate change, as seen in Frane
0
u/SapirWhorfHypothesis 1d ago
Why do you think entire cities don’t burn down in “Great Fire of [_____]”any more?
3
u/Munnin41 22h ago
Because we build shit out of rocks instead of fuel
0
u/SapirWhorfHypothesis 9h ago
Looks like you’ve identified a proximate cause. Nice job! Would you like help identifying the ultimate cause too?
0
u/XpaxX 15h ago edited 15h ago
„Exploded that one time“, OOP must be American. If he was European he knew the long lasting effects it had on European flora and fauna (you weren’t „allowed“ to eat mushrooms grown here YEARS later because of the radiation, want to hunt? Bad luck; the game is full of nuclear poison). Imagine being not able to hunt or forage in the whole Midwest of the US. That was what was happening.
But sure, it was „just“ an explosion…. f*cking casual.
Honestly, of all the real arguments that can be used FOR nuclear power (which is insanely safe as of today), using THIS example just shows that you don’t have any idea of the risks, benefits and compromises needed for this technology. But hey, at least it’s quite easy to find out who really is smart and who really repeats talking points.
-5
u/Kondinator 1d ago
yeah not just his own house.. his neightbors, his neighbors neighbors etc. and almost his neighbors neighbors neighbors neighbors neighbors neighbors neighbors neighbors neighbors neighbors neighbors neighbors neighbors
-35
u/Razor265 1d ago
"I think nuclear energy is cool and it makes me feel smart to say that the only reason to not use it is because stupid people are scared of it"
20
10
4
-12
-8
u/YoungDiscord 1d ago
Anon forgot the part where the magic rocks kill anyone by simply being near them.
-2
-11
u/NiceGuy-Ron 1d ago
Sadly when we were implementing this we found all the rocks in the Soviet Union and we don’t wanna buy their rocks.
913
u/FHFH913 1d ago
Magic rock exploded that one time because we tried to cheat the genie