• Hegar@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Burning down your house doesn’t poison people thousands of years later, so it’s not a perfect analogy.

    Plus we have magic mirrors and magic fans that do the same thing as the magic rocks just way cheaper.

    • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      We’ve upgraded from burning our houses down to burning our atmosphere down which will absolutely poison humans for centuries to come. And since we now burn larger fires with black rocks, those release far more magic rock dust that poisons people than the magic rock water heaters do. Not to mention that fire has both killed more of us cave dwellers than magic rocks ever have (including the flying weaponry runes made from them) and have caused more ecological disasters, so fire is much worse.

      Then we talk magic mirrors, they have evil rocks in them that get in our rivers and we don’t contain well. That aside, we show tradition to our ancestors by making much of them with slavery.

      And the magic fans? The design is very human. They’d be a gift from the gods if only the spirit of the wind were always with us.

      Summary: Magic rock still good, black rocks and black water make bad fire and hairless monkey make sick more.

  • NONE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well, you see, the “Anti Magic Rock” Lobby has immense amount of power because of the money of the still lucrative “burning stuff and pollute everything” business.

    • drake@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nuclear isn’t in competition with fossil fuels, it’s in competition with renewables. Renewables are better than nuclear by pretty much every conceivable metric. So fuck nuclear power, it’s a waste of money and time.

      • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Are you sure renewables don’t require more extracted resources and more land usage per quantity of energy produced?

      • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Fact: that is a fake statement.

        Nuclear is not renewables competition.

        Nuclear provides a base line energy production.

        Both renewables and fossils produce a variable production line.

        So within a rational production scheme the choice is nuclear+renewables or fossils+renewables. As renewables by themselves cannot work. Because there is months over the year when it’s not sunny, not rainy and not windy enough, what do we do for those months? We close humanity during those months because some political dogma says so?