• leadore@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    Just because burning fossil fuels is bad doesn’t magically make nuclear good, or somehow no big deal. The chance for a catastrophic accident mentioned in the meme is only one drawback (which is bad enough–get real, denial is not a strategy here). Just a few other issues:

    • the problem of what to do with the waste: no permanent solutions have yet been implemented and we’ve been using costly-to-maintain “temporary” methods for decades. Not to mention the thermal water pollution to aquatic ecosystems

    • the enormously out of proportion up front costs to construct the plants, and higher ongoing operation and maintenance costs due to safety risks in proportion to amount of power generated

    • the fact that uranium is also a limited resource that has to be mined like other ores, with all the environmental negatives of that, which then has to go through a lot of processing involving various mechanics and chemicals just to make it usable as fuel.

    Anyway I’m not going to try and go into more detail on a forum post, but all this advocacy for a very problematic method of producing power as if it’s a simple solution to our problems is kind of irritating. At least I hope the above shows we should stop pretending it’s “clean energy”. We should be focusing on developing renewable and sustainable energy systems.

    • dax@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I don’t get this advocacy either, makes me wonder why? Constructing a nuclear power plant usually takes decades, they are not a solution for the more immediate problem climate change. They also introduce lots of new problems, and it’s not sustainable either.