12
submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] TALD@lemmy.fmhy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Yeah if we want power at all there's a heavy carbon cost to it regardless where it comes from. Nuclear from what I understand is more compatible with our preexisting electricity networks because like coal it has big chunks of metal spinning to store energy giving the ability to react incredibly fast to changes in the network. Battery banks may be able to do this quick response, but the longevity of rare earth mineral based solutions although fancy has me concerned. Very little can degrade with a massive flywheel and the losses from nuclear to get it up and spinning would be far lower than say spinning it with motors as an energy store.

Long term I agree though, the complexities around nuclear don't paint it as our saviour. Maybe for now, and probably the next hundred years, leaning into nuclear is at least harm reduction

this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2023
12 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59038 readers
3147 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