this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
132 points (92.9% liked)

World News

32339 readers
542 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zloubida@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago (2 children)

The performance of nuclear power must be calculated in relation to its cost and risk. And here renewable energy is more than competitive.

[–] bastion@feddit.nl 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

This is a much more reasonable argument than most.

But third and fourth-gen nuclear are excellent sources of constant energy that don't require storage, and some of which have a tiny percentage of the waste stream of prior generations, and what waste they do produce is problematic along the lines of 400 years (as opposed to 27,000 years).

[–] horse_battery_staple@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Third and fourth gen can also use the waste that's currently being warehoused as well. So they'll be reducing environmental impact that's caused by the current waste stream.

[–] bastion@feddit.nl 2 points 4 days ago
[–] joe_@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I concur. Nuclear has had seventy years to compete. Renewable is cheaper and has nowhere near the political hurdles of nuclear.