this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2024
85 points (95.7% liked)

Technology

59589 readers
2891 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

My impression is that this is a PR push, designed to avoid having to invest in renewables, and let them keep on burning gas and coal, rather than something likely to come to fruition.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bizzle@lemmy.world 29 points 1 month ago (10 children)

Honestly, I know this is a polarizing issue, but nuclear is clean and pretty much safe and you don't need batteries for it. Lithium batteries of course being an ecological nightmare. Bring it on I say.

[–] nightwatch_admin@feddit.nl 8 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Mining for nuclear is an ecological disaster, and is often done in poor countries under awful conditions, especially lung cancer due to the radon emissions of uranium.

[–] SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Arguably it is better than mining for coal, lithium, etc. since those have similar issues, but one gram of uranium contains energy similar to 3 tons of coal.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)