• DrCake@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    Also it would take too long to build the nuclear plants. I’m all for building them but they’ll take like 10+ years. In the meantime we need to use solar/wind + batteries.

    • NielsBohron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      We could have avoided burning a ton of fossil fuels if nuclear hadn’t been demonized in the 60’s, but as it stands, that ship has sailed. Let’s skip that stage on the tech tree and move to fully renewable!

      Edit: I guess I should say that I think nuclear will and should continue to be a pivotal part of any smart grid for a long time, since it fills a niche that “true” renewables can’t yet. I just don’t think pushing to build them now is ideal, as it’s more pressing to decommission all fossil fuels plants ASAP by any means necessary (which might mean using only the existing nuclear plants while we ramp up production of other green energy sources)

      • growsomethinggood ()@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        7 months ago

        I think you are touching on something important in your edit, which is that diversity of energy source is important for long term grid stability. Solar+battery storage is looking really good right now and I completely agree we need to get on that asap. But there’s no magic bullet, no one technology that negates the need for any other. Headlines inherently reduce complex issues into bite sized information, but it’s important for science literacy to remember that things are complex and nuanced! We need wind and solar and hydroelectric and energy storage and nuclear and more.

        • NielsBohron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          7 months ago

          The tricky point here is that fossil fuels were a silver bullet for a long time! There is so much energy in those chemical bonds and they just bubbled out of the ground, so why wouldn’t we use that for everything?

          Trying to get people to understand nuance and using the right tool for the job is a lot trickier since most people inherently resist complexity as a solution for replacing a simple technology.

    • Addition1291@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I agree. With the cost reduction on renewables, grid-scale nuclear doesn’t make a lot of sense anymore.

      However, I hope that nuclear will get a revival with SMR technology. Especially as local power facilities for things like data centers and auto plants and other industrial facilities that require as much power as a small nation.