• Suzune@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    The problem is the waste. Germany has radioactive waste and it couldn’t find a suitable place to deposit it for over 30 years. I think it’s still somewhere on rails or in temporary storages. It’s horrible and they don’t want to collect more of it.

    Here is more about the problem that no one talks about: https://youtu.be/uU3kLBo_ruo

    • Pietson@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Nuclear waste is a potential issue. Fossil fuel waste is a major issue right now.

      The fact that the waste for nuclear is entirely contained is very good. It allows us to place it in permanent storage location like the one in Finland from your video, and perhaps even launch it off the planet in one or two centuries. There is no containing co2, only reducing.

      • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Putting highly radioactive waste on a rocket is a bad, bad idea.

        And guess what: solar and wind have neither CO2 nor nuclear waste as a product, and are cheaper to build and operate as well. Nuclear is comically expensive, and only gets by with massive state subsidies

        • TheOtherThyme@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          And guess what: solar and wind canot take care of base load. Only oil, gas, coal, or nuclear can be run 24-7 with varying output in response to demand. Choose one.