• Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    If you’re interested in energy solutions and haven’t read the RethinkX report on the feasibility of a 100% solar, wind and battery solution, it’s definitely worth taking a look.

    Whilst I agree that we need to decarbonise asap with whatever we can, any new nuclear that begins planning today is likely to be a stranded asset by the time it finishes construction. That money could be better spent leaning into a renewable solution in my view.

    • DivineDev@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      Exactly this. I am “in favor” of nuclear energy, but only in the sense that I’d like fossil power to be phased out first, then nuclear. Any money that could be spent on new nuclear power plants is better spent on solar and wind.

      • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I’d like Nuclear power not to be thrown out with the bathwater because it is practically essential for space travel/colonization in the long term. Solar panels can only get us so far, and batteries are a stop-gap. We need nuclear power because it is the only energy source that can meet our needs while being small enough to carry with us.

        All should praise the magic, hot rocks.

        • saigot@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          it is practically essential for space travel/colonization in the long term.

          Seems like it’s pretty important we not burn through our finite reserves of it if we can help it. I’m not saying we should reach zero nuclear, but I don’t think we should be relying on it too much either.

          • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            We are no where near close to running out of nuclear material. And for its energy density, we are unlikely to run out anytime in the next 10000 years. It can also be found in asteroids or other rocky bodies, so unlike wood or fossil fuels, Earth isn’t the only place to get it.

    • soloner@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      6 months ago

      The materials needed to produce batteries and wind turbines and maintain them over time is the issue. Did your 62 page report discuss this?

    • someguy3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Does it cover everyone on the planet using the same amount of electricity as a North American? 8 billion people now. And usage is increasing too, gotta power EVs and AI (but not limited to that).

      • Belastend@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        6 months ago

        im fine with dropping AI for more humans right now, but apparently that wont generate shareholder value.

        • someguy3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          First it doesn’t matter because it’s going to happen whether we want it to or not.

          Second the whole point is that electricity use per capita is always increasing.

          • Belastend@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            Nah, they won’t. It goes bling-bling, has a couple of good use cases, but because it generates Market Hype, Companies will cram it into everything. And i hate it.