New technology could reduce radioactivity in nuclear waste by up to 80%
New technology could reduce radioactivity in nuclear waste by up to 80%
A pesar de todos los avances realizados en los últimos cincuenta años la energía nuclear sigue siend...
You're viewing a single thread.
Nice try, nuclear lobby. We still dont want your dirty tech instead of 100% renewables.
Nice try petroleum and coal lobby, maybe try harder with the "clean coal" next time!
Are you drunk? Countries are already having 100% renewable usage days.
Yeah, tiny countries with very favourable conditions like Iceland.
Yeah, right. And the very favorable germany. Please get help.
If you think Germany is running on 100% renewables, you need help way more than I do.
59% over the entire year is a damn good start
US is much more favorable for renewable energy than Germany, lots more wind, solar and hydro potential. How can we not be doing at least as well. There’s no technical reason. No practical reason. No economic reason. Just a bunch of gullible people manipulated by fossil fuel companies, a bunch of gullible people manipulated by outrage media, a bunch of gullible people manipulated by politicians. Idiots. All of them. Or evil
Yeah, I wasn't trying to knock Germany. I'm German. But it's far from 100%, we still have lot of coal (even worse, lignite) plants ... and building more gas power plants. It's just not an example if a 100% renewable country. Iceland was (but that got me downvoted, lol).
Anyway, it's just lemmy. At least the debating about nuclear power doesn't get you banned :S
As a resident of a US state with very little potential for renewable energy, we’ve been trying. Solar is gangbusters, but a few idiots keep blocking offshore wind and we’re at the mercy of other states for blocking us from building transmission lines to get some of that sweet Canadian hydro (probably just as well, given our current idiotic federal govt)
Yeah. I'm not gonna bother discussing this with you. Please start reading at get off of telegram and 4chan. I suggest wikipedia or other "mainstream" sources of information. Good bye
You should take your own advice. It's a pretty simple thing to look up.
Pretty sure I saw news of the UK having 100% renewable energy days, and like a dozen US states believe it’s practical enough to have a roadmap ….. and those aren’t the states with the highest wind potential
Edit …. And there’s California with 100 100% renewable energy days out of 144 analyzed
We have a disinformation campaign running in here. Dont get discouraged. Something really crazy is going on in this place.
Nice try hydrogen lobby! You just want to perpetuate the production scarcity model. Maybe try harder with the "carbon credits" next time!
Nice try lithium lobby! You just want to ride the current wave of the "green" trend. Maybe try harder with "made using recycled lithium" stickers on battery powered devices next time!
That damn nuclear lobby, shipping metric tons of uranium across the world on nuclear powered ships, digging, stripping, pumping every single ounce of nuclear fuel all across the world on land and at sea, with a complete disregard towards human beings and the environment, all for billions in yearly profit.
These damn nuclear power exporters, wagging war on each other to gain control of nuclear resources to build more and more nuclear power plants, corrupting governments, killing people, polluting the air and the water all over the world. Pitting people against one another on carbon free energy generation, distracting from the real issue of completely getting rid of nuclear power generation to keep the planet livable in the future.
Yeah, that goddamn nuclear power lobby and nuclear power itself are definitely the problem in the fight against climate change.
Trying to make it funny does not change the fact that it is total moral corruption to push nuclear. There are long and detailed lists why nuclear is not the solution. Among them is that statistically, chernobil definitely will happen again, and it did btw. Long term storage is insanely expensive and we already are approaching high levels of renewables. The time we need to build nuclear reactors, next to the materials make it all just a pipe dream to mentally divest from renewables.
Its the same disinformation as immigrants taking our jobs and homes. Nuclear still requires someone with far superior technology. Otherwise you risk mass death. Renewables are easy to operate.
You realize the ultimate source of renewable energy is nuclear fusion?
Sure. Like from The Sun. We utilize that through photovoltaics and wind turbine generators. The wind is generated by uneven heating of the Earth by The Sun.
Of course, you're talking about nuclear fission, not nuclear fusion. That's what happens in a nuclear reactor.
Nincompoop.
Im talking about nuclear fusion not nuclear fission. But clearly youre here to troll and not actually have any understanding of the issues at hand
The article is talking about nuclear waste. Fusion is not yet an established and actually working energy source, despite what disinformation campaigns are trying to tell you.
"Nuclear" currently describes nuclear fission, which is the only way of actually producing energy as of today.
So YOU might mean fusion, but nobody else does.
Okay. Are you at school? Please ask your teacher to explain the difference between FUSION and FISSION.
Hey, you seem to be confused about their comment. Maybe ask YOUR teacher about reading comprehension.
Please go on about the morals of an inherently amoral tech.
Goof.
What?
Just as expected.
Just going to point out most of these comments, including the original, are based on Chernobyl which was a reactor not built to standard and based older tech even during its time. I'm not against renewables, but a nuclear reactor is definitely better than a coal plant or natural gas plant in terms of energy production, safety (modern tech to today, stop thinking Chernobyl) CO2 production, and sustainability.
Fukushima was supposed to be better. It wasn't. They weren't an abandoned Soviet reactor, they were efficient, well-trained Japanese. 3 mile island was America. It can happen anywhere.
Don't compare nuclear to coal. Nobody's making new coal plants, and they sure wouldn't have been replaced by a far more expensive nuclear plant.
You are against renewables. In the time it takes to design, build, and start operation of a nuclear plant, you could have made an entire factory to produce wind turbines or photovoltaics, and have been making product for years before the nuclear plant even opens. If they open, because most nuclear reactors don't go online due to cost overruns, time overruns, construction problems, etc... Then they just sit there, a big concrete foundation making zero energy.
Your thinking is out of the 1970's-80's. Completely outdated by at least 50 years.
Fukushima shouldn't have been built that close to a fault line and the ocean.
Well I tried. Seems like I'm getting a response from. someone who is offended at the idea of nuclear energy and now using feelings to make a statement. Fukushima was hit by a massive earthquake and tsunami and it didn't go critical like Chernobyl. Again, renewables are a great idea until you have to scale in massive countries. This is why China has started up Thorium reactors and aggressively going after fusion. They have massive solar plants too! And yes, there are plans for idiots to start up new coal plants in the US, because they're idiots.
Yes daddy fill me with sweet coal, gas and lithium 🥵
The matrix happened because the machines used renewables thus the enemy eternally destroyed the atmosphere.
If the machines used nuclear energy they would have won.
God bless all intelligent forms