662
submitted 4 months ago by spicytuna62@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] then_three_more@lemmy.world 55 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Just because it's safe doesn't mean it's the best we have right now.

  • It's massively expensive to set up
  • It's massively expensive to decommission at end of life
  • Almost half of the fuel you need to run them comes from a country dangerously close to Russia. (This one is slightly less of a thing now that Russia has bogged itself down in Ukraine)
  • It takes a long time to set up.
  • It has an image problem.

A combination of solar, wind, wave, tidal, more traditional hydro and geothermal (most of the cost with this is digging the holes. We've got a lot of deep old mines that can be repurposed) can easily be built to over capacity and or alongside adequate storage is the best solution in the here and now.

[-] uis@lemm.ee -4 points 4 months ago

You realise you don't need to decomission entire building at EOL?

[-] bmarinov@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

What about the storage for the used fuel? This is a massive problem for any country not occupying half a continent.

[-] uis@lemm.ee 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

As first step separate useful isotopes from used fuel. Most of used fuel are them. The rest won't be as big.

load more comments (14 replies)
this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2024
662 points (69.5% liked)

Memes

45660 readers
712 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. 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