this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
249 points (85.3% liked)

Science Memes

11047 readers
3153 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
249
Anon questions our energy sector (slrpnk.net)
submitted 5 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
74 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

"85% of used fuel rods can be recycled" is like "We can totally capture nearly all the carbon from burning fossil fuels and then remove the rest from the atmosphere by other means".

In theory it's correct. In reality it's bullshit that will never happen because it's completely uneconomical and it's just used as an excuse to not use the affordable technology we already have available and keep burning fossil fuels.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Capturing all the extra carbon from the atmosphere is not as expensive as it sounds like. It can easily be done by a few rich countries in very few decades once we stop adding more there every day.

Recycling nuclear waste is one of those problems that should be easy but nobody knows what the easy way looks like. It's impossible to tell if some breakthrough will make it viable tomorrow or if people will have to work for 200 years to get to it. But yeah, currently it's best described as "impossible".

[–] [email protected] 1 points 41 minutes ago

Capturing all the extra carbon from the atmosphere is not as expensive as it sounds like. It can easily be done by a few rich countries in very few decades once we stop adding more there every day.

What?

For starters, carbon capture takes an insane amount of power. And to follow up: we couldn't even build the facilities is "a few decades" even if we free power and infinite money.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, you're not making any sense. How is the recyclability of nuclear fuel rods an excuse to keep burning fossil fuels? That's a massive leap in logic that demands an explanation.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

They’re saying that plausible uses don’t necessarily translate to real world use, in practice. I have no stake in this, just translating

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago

While I understand where they're coming from, it should be noted that they're likely basing their experience with recyclability on plastic recycling which is totally a shit show. The big difference comes in when you realize that plastic is cheap as shit whereas uranium fuel rods are not.