this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
217 points (87.5% liked)

Memes

45643 readers
1163 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
217
reactor bad.jpg (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You'll only need a few great lakes worth of water for most major cities.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That's the easy part we've got plenty of ocean the hard part is building the mountain

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Could we use landfills? 2 birds 1 stone

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Set them on fire first for the aesthetic

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's not viable everywhere or at scale. Creating new reservoirs would also cause great environmental damage.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Silly me I didn't realize we were just going to install mountains every time we needed a battery. Unfortunately most of humanity lives on the coast unfortunately most of the coast is flat...

Furthermore we would still need to increase a renewable production by over 60% before we would be able to maintain base load and even need the pump storage but go on.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Our country barely has any coast. And we're done with nuclear anyway, so that sounds like a you problem.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And hydrogen, and batteries, and overbuilding, and geographic distribution and a lot more but nukeheads gonna nukehead.

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

I do not think you comprehend how much power would need to be stored. We are steadily electrifying every single industry year after year we use more and more electricity to power that demand we are burning more fossil fuels than ever before while in conjunction utilizing more renewables than ever before well maintaining the same average nuclear load for the last 20 years....

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Renewables and storage is what is gonna happen, you can argue against that as much as you want. Growth of renewables is exponential, growth of nuclear is nonexistent.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I swear to God you're going to kill me with an aneurysm. It's only non-existent because of dumbasses like you. Like facts I also do not give a single fuck about your feelings. We are at a tipping point. We cannot scale renewable production to the point we would need to scale it to In a short enough time for them to be a viable solution alone. Therefore we need to continue to implement renewables while also replacing the most egregious CO2 contributors such as coal fired plants with reactors.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Its nonexistent because its expensive and impractical. Every cent spent for nuclear is a wasted cent because you would get twice the power from renewables. LCOE.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Give it up man, I've had clashes with renewabots, and they are adamant that we can run the entire grid on tinker toys and batteries.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The sad part is they're not wrong they're just 80 to 100 years out of scope. The theory is there it's the capacity to produce and the inability to store that kills it. Also I know I'm not convincing him. The point of comment threads like this is for the people who are uninformed and undecided as of yet.