Geography olays a big role there. There are many places where the capacity of hydro needed requires more than is environmentally safe to dam. We would have to have gigantic mega projects to build new lakes and resivoirs. (Much slower and more labor intensive than building nuclear plants)
If nuclear doesn’t fill the gaps it will be fossil fuels.In the current moment, an ‘always no matter what’ anti nuclear stance is just a pro oil and coal stance.
Hydro. There you go. We don’t need nuclear we need a combo of renewables. Somehow it is possible do the top countries here just have an amazing magical grid? 70 countries with more than half from renewables https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_renewable_electricity_production
Geography olays a big role there. There are many places where the capacity of hydro needed requires more than is environmentally safe to dam. We would have to have gigantic mega projects to build new lakes and resivoirs. (Much slower and more labor intensive than building nuclear plants)
If nuclear doesn’t fill the gaps it will be fossil fuels.In the current moment, an ‘always no matter what’ anti nuclear stance is just a pro oil and coal stance.
How much resivoirs does denmark have? You just bought imto nuclear pro stance