Memes

45550 readers

1111 users here now

Rules:

Be civil and nice.
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

[email protected]

658

Nuclear isn't perfect, but it is the best we have right now. (lemmy.world)

submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

585 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Are solar and wind really "clean" energy? Everyone in this thread seems to ignore the costs of these methods.

Every modern wind turbine requires 60 gallons of highly synthetic oil to function, and it needs to be changed every 6 months. That's a lot of fossil fuel use.

Lithium mining for batteries is extremely destructive to the environment.

Production of solar panels burns lots of fuel and produces many heavy metals. Just like with nuclear waste, improper disposal of these toxic elements can be devastating to the environment.

Of course, solar and wind are a big improvement over coal and natural gas. I dont want the perfect to be the enemy of the good, I just want to be realistic about the downfalls of these methods.

I believe, with our current technology, that nuclear is our cleanest and greenest option.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Ok so, realistically, if we all agree on this today, when would new nuclear power plants begin generating electricity? With all the regulations which are in place today?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

≈20-30 years, outside of China. They should have the first molten salt reactors being turned on in another 8 years or so, but they started those projects in 2020

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

If we "all agree" and do a moonshot construction plan we could have electricity in 8 years. This is a fantasy, tho.

Best case scenario in the real world is operational in 12 years.

In the capitalist hellscape here in the US, a reasonable expectation would be 18-20 years.

20 years also happens to be the lifespan of our wind turbines. In 20 years, all of the currently running wind turbine blades will be in a landfill and new ones will need to be manufactured to replace them.

No reasonable person is suggesting nuclear as a short-term option. It's a long term investment.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If you're going to do that, then also consider the co2 output of all the concrete needed for nuclear power plants.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

And the environmental impact of mining and enriching the fuel.