352
Spicy Air ☢️ (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/science_memes@mander.xyz
128 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/68257855

Nuclear is the best btw.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 6 months ago* (10 children)

That's beside the point. Nuclear isn't sustainable on the long run, period.And solar can potentially generate all the electricity needed and more by itself.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (9 children)

    it isn't, transmission is a complex thing to do lol, my country had a full blackout last year because a cascading failure caused by a transmission line.

    Nuclear fuel will last long enough for us to both have nuclear fission and the capacity to space mine materials.

    solar doesn't work in places that don't have land available to be turned into solar farms, here in chile they do a lot of solar, and cool melted salt solar too, but is far north in the Atacama and they have to bring it in, wich is a huge bottle neck, A nuclear power plant in Santiago would relieve a lot the strain in the grid.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago* (8 children)

    Yes, transmission is a complex thing to do, and that's why more funds should used to improve research in that direction, rather than wasting hundreds of billions on ticking time bombs, so that mining company owners can get richer while making us sicker.

    1 hour of sunlight that hits the sunlit hemisphere, contains enough energy to satisfy the needs of the whole planet for 1 year. That's how much solar is better than nuclear.

    I really can't believe that in 2026, the idea of generating energy by boiling water, is still considered "advanced tech" just because they wanna use a different fuel. Lol

    And no, solar doesn't need land.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 6 months ago* (7 children)

    Solar still uses boiling water, thermosolar at least, that has a lot of benefits over the photovoltaic cell, as it can generate energy steadily and even trough the night, here in chile they built cerro dominador, quite impressive thing.

    it depends on the geography of the place, in my country it would be reasonably a huge challenge to build farms over the sea because of the geography of here (it's like a underwater cliff)

    and still, I'm heavily pro renewables, but that doesn't I won't be pro nuclear also, both are crucial tech to de-carbonize the world.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago* (4 children)

    Photovoltaic is the future, it'sprettyy much unarguably the only technology that can create energy without moving parts or without any sort of burning.

    You don't get any more futuristic than this. The only problem with photovoltaic and wind is that they've been actively boycotted.

    Here in the UK energy providers habitually stop their own wind turbines just because otherwise the price of energy will get too low. That's how fucked up the system is. And nuclear is nothing more than an astute way for these capitalist pigs in control of the energy sector to keep making money from something that should be free already.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    I fully agree that solar will be the majority of electricity produced in the near future, but photovoltaic has the disadvantage of following the sun, and honestly, chermical batteries aren't really the solution (and I'm saying this when my country is one of the biggest lithium producers in the world) Gravity batteries are, but surprise surprise, they are water turbines and water pumps lol, they will last way longer than a chermical battery anyways.

    Thermosolar has the molten salt as a buffer between the sun and the electricity, you can use it to produce energy steadily, even in the night, wich solves the problem of having to build gravity damns and the associated risk of them.

    I'm confident studying mech, because it isn't going away anytime soon.

    and yeah, I full agree that we need to reform the power grid and enact at least partial statization.

    but still, nuclear is a good tech that can produce clean energy right where is needed, we shouldn't discard it just because renewables are quite O.P.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    chemical batteries are not the solution [because they have too short a life]

    Thermosolar [is good because energy is stored in heat overnight]

    The key is cost. Renewables and batteries are cheaper over any time period than thermal, much cheaper than any boiling water generator

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    I agree with most of the comment, but it really bothers me people still call nuclear "clean", it isn't, its the opposite. Yes no co2, but the effects of burnt nuclear fuel are way worse. Yes the crisis comes slower than the current climate crisis but it last for way longer and is way harder to manage.

    Co2 I. The atmosphere in large amounts is bad for humanity, no question, we should stop that, but with co2 we at least have an advanced ecosystem which will bring the co2 levels down relatively quickly on human time scales if we stop emitting before the ecosystem is irreparable damaged, with nuclear we dont. There us exactly one way to get rid of radioactive waste, and that is to wait till it stops radiating by itself, magnitudes longer than it takes for co2 to get absorbed by plants.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    the case for grid-scale batteries is getting stronger every month:

    the more people driving EVs the more used EV batteries will become available… EVs require a pretty good energy density, but grid storage can buy up a bunch of dirt cheap EV batteries with 60% capacity and call it a day, and then onsell them for recycling in 10 years for exactly the same price (because the raw materials are the same: recyclers don’t care if the battery has 100% or 60% or 50% max capacity)

    other battery tech is also getting much more interesting, like sodium batteries. they don’t have the energy density of lithium, but they’re more durable and have less fire risk. they’re pretty ideal for grid-scale storage, and when commodities of scale kick in with them they’re likely to become pretty common in grid storage and prices and usefulness just gets better from there

    also, afaik gravity batteries aren’t really being used… the most common thing these days looks like it’s going to be flywheels, but using them more like capacitors: smoothing out load spikes and maintaining grid frequency (which with PV can go downhill fast)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent