this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2026
947 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

85602 readers
3523 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 18 points 6 days ago (1 children)

This is actually a pretty major indictment on the US. Coal is one of the worst most inefficient fuel sources for power generation, virtually every other fuel source is an improvement including incineration of food waste.

A good test of how efficient fuel is is to see how much of it you still have left after you've theoretically burnt all of it. The fact that coal smoke is black is a pretty good indication of how bad it is. You're throwing away a good chunk of your fuel.

[–] Nurgus@lemmy.world 16 points 6 days ago (3 children)

I love the trivia that there's traces of uranium in coal which go up with the smoke - coal is worse than nuclear in terms of radiological pollution.

[–] ExperiencedWinter@lemmy.world 13 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

When looking if it was feasible to convert coal power plants to nuclear, we found out that most of the coal sites have more radioactivity than is allowed for a future nuclear site

[–] Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] smeenz@lemmy.nz 2 points 5 days ago

What does Freddie have to do with this ?

[–] VoodooMischief@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

This is an often misquoted fact. The study that compared coal and nuclear was only studying air pollutants, and obviously the steam stacks from nuclear reactors don’t have as much radionuclide pollutants as coal. However, the study did not look at other sources like wastewater - which is where most radionuclide pollution from nuclear reactors comes from (along with other sources like spent fuel, casings, and moderator rods).

[–] hark@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

Sure, but I assume it's easier to collect wastewater for proper disposal than the air pollutants.