• SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 hours ago

    No it’s about nuclear waste and where to store it, it’s about how expensive it is to build a nuclear power plant (bc of regulations so they don’t goo boom) and it’s about how much you have to subsidize it to make the electricity it produces affordable at all. Economically it’s just not worth it. Renewables are just WAY cheaper.

    • el_abuelo@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Funny how people think waste is why we don’t use nuclear power.

      You noticed how we’re all fine breathing in poison and carcinogens? Still haven’t banned burning fossil fuels.

      It’s a money problem and a PR problem

    • bouh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 minutes ago

      Renewable are so cheap, especially when we don’t need as much energy! Fortunately we won’t need as much energy in winter now. :-)

  • Takumidesh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Funny how nuclear power plants are taboo, but building thousands of nuclear warheads all over the globe is no issue.

    • fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Funny how building nuclear power plants that can only (if you have dipshits running them) kill a nearby city is taboo, but climate change that will kill everyone is acceptable to the moralists.

      • oyo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Funny how solar, wind, and batteries are way cheaper and faster to build yet people are still talking about nuclear.

        • CybranM@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          31 minutes ago

          If only people weren’t fearmongering about nuclear 50 years ago we’d have clean energy today.

          “The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago, second best is now”

        • fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Stopping nuclear from being built is the problem.

          We would have had a lot more clean energy than we do by now if we let the nuclear power plants that “would take too long to build!” be built back then, because they’d be up and running by now.

          More letting perfect be the enemy of good.

        • fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 hours ago

          Funny how being polite didn’t convince you so now you’re trying to sell that being mean is going to stop you. You were always useless.

          • meliaesc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Hey, I hear you, life is stressful and there’s a lot going on. It’s okay to be upset, I hope whatever you’re going through gets easier.

            • fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 hours ago

              Misanthropy doesn’t require anger. It’s a philosophical position not a mood ring.

              I’m not lashing out, my “audience” is full of genuinely, aggressively, useless people who think stupid shit like “trump is better for Gaza” or “nuclear power is not a required part of the climate change solution”.

              • meliaesc@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                4 hours ago

                Is there a particular reason you think everyone, here specifically, believes those things?

                Edit: I absolutely share your passion about climate change, as a preface. Calling someone, who agrees with you or not, “useless” makes them dismiss your opinion. It just means we can’t engage in any meaningful discussion and others are less likely to take action.

  • OprahsedCreature@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 hours ago

    The problem isn’t that they exploded one time. The problem is that that one explosion is still happening and likely will be for quite a while.

    On the other hand, modern rock exploding plant designs are so much better that it’s very unlikely to repeat itself, so there’s that.

    • Baylahoo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I’m sure the other rock/liquid/gas burning plants have had no issues along their lifetime and had no hand in demonizing the “new” slowly exploding rock technology after extreme negligence let the one big one happen. /s

      I’d take the band aid of nuclear in my backyard vs what we rely on now after learning all of the insider knowledge of someone who personally worked in energy generation that did all of this plus renewables almost their entire professional life.

  • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    Paraphrased but this is right.

    And the people were taught to talk about the horrible nuclear accidents that killed a few but completely glance over the unimaginable millions perished in the name of oil, mustn’t even mention the mass extinction events we launched with oil.

    We even spread exaggerated bullshit about radiation mutation (wtf? thats superhero comic books fiction!!) and cancer rates (only one really), ignoring how much overwhelmingly more of the both we get from fossil fuel products.

    We are like prehistoric people going extinct bcs of the tales how generations ago someone burned down their house so fire bad. Well, actually not like that - we are taking with us a lot of species & entire ecosystems too.

    • Mr Fish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 hours ago

      It’s more like “Bob and Jim died in a fire a while ago, so everyone decided to put up with heaps of people dying to hypothermia and uncooked meat”

      • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 hours ago

        The local undertaker family tells the story about Bob and Jim once a week to the whole village (attendance is mandatory).

    • Mbourgon everywhere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 hours ago

      “Ted Kennedy killed more people than Three Mile Island” - Bumper sticker.

      That’s said, I facepalm at Fukushima. And desperately want more modern systems

  • ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 hours ago

    arent we out of uranium by 2040 anyway? op can have our “nucular” waste anytime. why even waste time on a resource that we cant use in 15 yrs from now? super stupid.

  • Mora@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 hours ago

    For huge countries as like the US: Maybe. You have enough space to also store the trash somewhere for thousands of years.

    For small countries, like most of Europe, where the population density is way higher: hard pass.

    • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      Storage isn’t that much of a problem, even in smol Europe countries.

      Also it’s contained in specific areas, some nerds are bound to wanna reuse what we now think of as trash/spent fuel. If it’s still radioactive after it just means it radiates energy, we just didn’t commercially learned how to harness it. There are ongoing studies into that too.

      And radiation isn’t as problematic as we are taught by media - humans lived in Chernobyl exclusion zone until death by old age, mammals there are thriving. The dangers of radiation are immediate tissue damage or thyroid cancer (again via tissue damage) if iodine isn’t taken by exposed people.

    • AngryMob@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Those same countries that found space for all the rest of their industrial waste?

      Nuclear waste has a tiny footprint. Fence off a couple square km for security, dig a small but deep hole, and there ya go.

      Obviously oversimplifying, but the point is that nuclear waste is a tiny issue. The entire world’s waste could be stored in a single warehouse if we wanted to (we don’t).

    • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 hours ago

      iirc nuclear waste isn’t really that big of an issue anymore, they just drill a really deep hole that’s like a foot across and nobody will ever see it again

  • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 hours ago

    You’re right to reject the logic behind that because it’s nonsense. Its not making sense to them because they still presume some kind of good faith when it come to these sorts of things.

    The reason we haven’t built more nuclear power stations is because oil, gas and coal companies will make less money, if we build more nuclear power stations.

    They have the means, the motive and they have a well recorded history of being that cartoonishly villainous. Nothing else makes sense.

    • Baylahoo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 hours ago

      It’s crazy that Mr. Burns from the Simpsons was in nuclear and not coal or oil. Probably a product of the propaganda at the time.

    • Screen_Shatter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Three Mile Island and Chernobyl really did change things. Prior to those incidents there were plans to build over 50 more nuclear plants in place which got canceled as a result. Currently oil and gas industries will do all they can to keep nuclear from making a come back, but for a long time they didn’t have to do shit thanks to those catastrophes.

    • moitoi@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      Na it’s dumb. The issue with the magic rocks isn’t the direct consequences like with the fire. The issues with these rocks are long terms with the consequences on humans and the environment thousands of years later.

      • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        What consequences?
        There are no consequences for animals in Chernobyl, they are thriving in all aspects, even mammals living underground (mutations are fiction).

        People that didn’t leave the exclusion zone died of old age there.

        Life on Earth had to deal with all sorts of radiation.

        What caused mass extinction was ecosystem change, eg via global climate change.

      • dev_null@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Yeah, the environmental issues that are orders of magnitude less problematic than literally pumping the toxic chemicals into the atmosphere like with fossil fuels, vs comparatively miniscule amount of solid waste to store inert.

        • T156@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Coal smoke is more radioactive than the outside of a fission reactor anyhow.

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 hours ago

        these rocks are long terms with the consequences on humans and the environment thousands of years later.

        You bury them in concrete, done. Nuclear waste isn’t an issue and hasn’t ever been

    • Agent641@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Except the retard didn’t just burn his house down, he burned thousands of people’s houses down in such a way that nobody could ever live there again, and came very close to burning down the whole continent in the same way.

      (I’m still in favour of spicy rock steam)

      • Valmond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Isn’t nuclear energy like super safe and have killed incredibly few people compared to all the other energy sources?

        Or are you talking about destilling the magic rocks very much and putting them in a bomb?

        • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          9 hours ago

          Exactly.

          The whole clusterfuck of mishandled Chernobyl cleanup & everything there before and after only claimed a few lives (via direct radiation tissue damage or just accidents).

          Compare that with the daily average of thousands of killed in various (ultimately) oil wars.

          But we don’t even get news about that.

          But western propaganda sure showed us malformed babies & claimed it was from radiation - it turns out it was all bullshit, it was always a toxic chemical behind it (unregulated industries selling toxic shit by the tonnes - fertilisers, paints, even biological warfare).

          We just take radiation super seriously and completely disregard toxic chemical pollution of eg industrial spillages. People just get to live in polluted areas and die sooner because of that. Instead of living for longer & with less health hazards but with a little radiation.

          And lastly - burning coal released way more radiation into air than nuclear accidents.

      • frayedpickles@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Or to put it another way, we almost ruined a large swath of land and learned from that mistake, but chose not to use it so when we do have to switch to nukes because destroyed our planet we will have forgotten all those lessons and do it again.

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 hours ago

        It has that low death rate precisely because it is heavily regulated.

        The typical nuclear booster argument works on the following circular logic:

        “Nuclear is perfectly safe.”

        “But that’s not the problem with nuclear. The problem with nuclear is its too expensive.”

        “Nuclear is expensive because it’s overly regulated!”

        “But nuclear is only safe because of those heavy regulations!”

        “We would have everything powered by nuclear by now if it weren’t for Greenpeace.”

        • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 hours ago

          It feels like it is otherwise we wouldn’t possibly use it.

          Imagine dangerous drilling, all the complex refining, the mass transpiration systems around the world moving billions of tonnes, etc. It’s stupid and complex. The system to enable it was somewhat forced & def forced to maintain it, it’s well documented actually.

    • frayedpickles@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Just put it somewhere noone lives like the Dakotas or places people who don’t matter live, like west Virginia. All the coal miners getting cancer anyway, why not double tap?

        • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          The coal mining industry employs about 38,000 people. Dunkin Donuts alone employs seven times as many people as the whole coal mining industry. There just aren’t that many coal miners anymore. And everyone currently involved with it joined up knowing full well the days of coal were numbered.

    • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Most of those didn’t involve the magic rocks, and most didn’t hurt anyone.

      More people die creating the building materials for a powerplant (or a windmills, or a solar panel) than ever during operation. The numbers really don’t matter.

      I honestly don’t care what we do, as long as we stop burning coal, oil and gas. The way I see it, every nuclear plant and windmill means we all die a little later.

  • don@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Anon is so dense that he will surpass the Poincaré recurrence time of the Universe, and will exist forever. This also means that for every iteration of the current universe he passes through, another iteration of anon will be produced, such that there will eventually be enough idiot anons to form its own entire universe.

    Anon is infinitely and eternally stupid.

  • Hegar@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Burning down your house doesn’t poison people thousands of years later, so it’s not a perfect analogy.

    Plus we have magic mirrors and magic fans that do the same thing as the magic rocks just way cheaper.

    • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      We had magic mirrors and magic fans for centuries tho.

      Yet we decided to release way more poison and even way more radiation by mining and burning fossil fuels. We just poison larger areas than any nuclear disasters. And with fossil fuels people actually get cancer, and with toxic byproducts, mutations and birth defects.

      People in polluted areas die sooner. Except around nuclear disasters sights - the air gets cleaner once all the people are thrown out.

      • Hegar@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 hours ago

        We had magic mirrors and magic fans for centuries tho.

        We’ve had solar and wind electricity generation for centuries?

    • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      12 hours ago

      We’ve upgraded from burning our houses down to burning our atmosphere down which will absolutely poison humans for centuries to come. And since we now burn larger fires with black rocks, those release far more magic rock dust that poisons people than the magic rock water heaters do. Not to mention that fire has both killed more of us cave dwellers than magic rocks ever have (including the flying weaponry runes made from them) and have caused more ecological disasters, so fire is much worse.

      Then we talk magic mirrors, they have evil rocks in them that get in our rivers and we don’t contain well. That aside, we show tradition to our ancestors by making much of them with slavery.

      And the magic fans? The design is very human. They’d be a gift from the gods if only the spirit of the wind were always with us.

      Summary: Magic rock still good, black rocks and black water make bad fire and hairless monkey make sick more.

        • CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 hours ago

          One must be very careful when digging for magic hot rocks or else you expose the evil spirit vapors. Our ancestors knew that where there is magic, some evil lurks. As they did then, we do now when we accept a better evil in return for the magic we believe may do more good than before.

      • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        This is exactly, factually right, and eloquently put using the same meme terminology people here understand.

  • Bosht@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 hours ago

    I always wonder where we would actually be at as a civilization if it weren’t for fuckass lobbyists and money hoarding greedy assholes. This is a perfect example. If we’d learned from our mistakes and actually improved on nuclear energy there’s no telling where we’d be at this point.

  • kbal@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Step 1: Get magic rocks.

    Step 2: Now design the rest of the nuclear reactor.

  • _bcron_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    “Right in the heart of it is an itty bitty windmill and that just don’t sit right with me” - That one cousin at Thanksgiving