• BlanK0@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I would rather see more investment on better renewable tech then relaying on biohazard.

    You would be surprised to know the amount of scientific research with actual solutions that aren’t applied cause goes against the fossil fuel companies and whatnot. Due to the fact that they have market monopoly.

    • The Stoned Hacker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Nuclear is the best and most sustainable energy production long term. You get left with nuclear waste which we are still figuring out how to deal with, but contemporary reactors are getting safer and more efficient. Not to mention breeder reactors can use the byproducts of their energy production to further produce energy.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      I would rather see more investment on better renewable tech then relaying on biohazard.

      Modern nuclear energy produces significantly less waste and involves more fuel recycling than the historical predecessors. But these reactors are more expensive to build and run, which means smaller profit margins and longer profit tails.

      Solar and Wind are popular in large part because you can build them up and profit off them quickly in a high-priced electricity market (making Texas’s insanely expensive ERCOT system a popular location for new green development, paradoxically). But nuclear power provides a cheap and clean base load that we’re only able to get from coal and natural gas, atm. If you really want to get off fossil fuels entirely, nuclear is the next logical step.