88
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 day ago

The thing with nuclear power is that it's FAR easier to convert a fossil fuel generator to nuclear than it is to convert it to green or to build a new one.

And yes, I agree, we need more green, but we first need to kill off all the fossil fuel options.

[-] wizzor@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago

Although you are right in the sense that nuclear produces steam, I am not aware of any instance of this having been done. The steam turbine is such a small part of a nuclear plant.

In my view nuclear is best as a baseline production and heat production method. The baseline part may reduce as grid batteries smooth out the volatile production of the renewables.

[-] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 day ago

Coal-to-Nuclear is actually pretty common, LINK

[-] yakko@feddit.uk 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

As a society, it's easier to do everything at once rather than one thing at a time. Edit: The difference with nuclear is that it's so much more expensive than other green options that spending on it now takes significant potential kwh out of the grid if it is given equal funding priority.

this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2026
88 points (93.1% liked)

Anarchism

3231 readers
23 users here now

Discuss anarchist praxis and philosophy. Don't take yourselves too seriously.


Other anarchist comms


Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS