• starik@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Not true. Nuclear works 24/7 without the need for battery storage and the cost and environmental damage associated with manufacturing batteries. Plus, it can be dialed up and down in response to demand.

    We need to use all available tools to replace fossil fuels ASAP. Renewables and nuclear.

    • SomeLemmyUser@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      You got mislead my dude. Probably because there’s lot of propaganda for nuclear as it is needed to offload costs of building nuclear weapons, so especially USA, France and China are campaigning hard.

      We dont need another finite fossil resource oligarchs can use to control us, we need to change societies habits so it complies with energy production. For the actually relevant parts its easy enough to store the energy. Batteries are not the only possibility, water elevation, hydrogen, pressure cells just to name a few. But even if batteries were the only ones, it’s still worth manufacturing them compared to the costs of managing nuclear waste for timescales longer than human build structures exists.

      Did a medieval person know what wages today would be? No Do you know what the nuclear end storage would cost in 1000 years? No But even for the time we can for see, in the best case scenario its an economically bad decission, in the worst case we poison the whole planet to a degree where no human life can exist.