54
Not a single one (thelemmy.club)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/science_memes@mander.xyz
131 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 44 points 3 months ago (11 children)

Even if this were true, would that be important nowadays? If it can push out climate change and make it into a problem to solve later (in case of fission). Fusion would be great though

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 19 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    It can't. It takes WAY too long to build, and for what it is the whole work isn't worth it.

    The volume of renewables and batteries (Incl. Sodium-Ion, great tech for the grid) we can produce outpaces nuclear by a long shot, is safer, cleaner, available quicker, easier to install, easier to regulate (once the batteries are up, it's a combo deal) and especially more "for the people" (you can carry and install smaller units of solar and wind anywhere).

    I also thought nuclear (fission) made somewhat sense a few years ago, but it really doesn't in any way shape or form. Countries who're dead-set on nuclear such as France are already running into SO mamy problems. They're building a huge financial pile of shit for the current and next generation to be fucked over by.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Why not do all of these things. Build nuclear power plants, do battery storage, do renewables, carbon capture, plant trees etc, etc, etc. if the goal is reverse, stabilize or slow climate change. There isn't 1 silver bullet, we need to do all the things.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Because money is finite. There's a good rationale for diversity of renewables, but at some point you have to look at the cost benefit analysis and let some ideas go. We could maybe harvest some energy from dropping gold bars into the Mariana trench, but it would take away money from better ideas.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    In a cash based capitalists society yes. Time to take the step towards a non scarcity world!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    Then resources and labour would be finite. You can't just escape scarcity.

    And anyone who confuses the problems with capitalism and currency is an idiot and their economic arguments should not be taken seriously.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    If it can push out climate change and make it into a problem to solve later (in case of fission).

    Pushing all the problems nuclear brings to the future is the exact same mistake past generations have done with fossil fuels.

    If we don't combat climate change now, we never will.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    The sentiment that people should just pay more than they have to become virtuous is hatred of the poor.

    We must provide the cheapest power to the people. And cheap in this case is meant as cheapest including externalities.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent