• schnokobaer@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    Loads of people love to pretend an NPP is just a hut with a magic gem inside delivering an endless amount of power for free. In reality they are huge, highly complex, high-security facilities that take decades and billions to build and need to be operated and maintained by loads of highly trained staff in 24/7 shift operations. This isn’t to downplay their merit of providing CO2 emission free power, but for the love of god please appreciate the enormous effort and expense this is achieved with, especially when comparing it to renewables.

    • Rolder@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      From what I understand, the costs and time needed to build a reactor would be far less if the constructions crews actually had experience building them.

    • gummybootpiloot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      Things that don’t exist yet aren’t a solution for problems we have now.

      It’s not like we could now just build a thorium reactor that makes economic sense without decades of serious prototyping. And by that time we might have found that there are more pbolems with it than we thought.

        • andrewth09@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Solar panels require a specific grade of silicone as a rare(ish) raw material input that requires extraction and heavy processing. Wind turbines don’t really use anything that is not readily available (steel, aluminum, fiber glass, etc.)

          The technology to recycle solar panels still needs to be developed. The technology to recycle solar panel blades exists, but has not scaled up yet.

          I’m not saying solar/wind have no material cost. I am saying the process for refining uranium requires extracting a lot of uranium ore.

          • winterayars@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            You don’t actually need that much uranium though. Yeah it’s a big operation, but that stuff goes a long way.

            Even wind power needs rare earth elements like neodymium and dysprosium, which pretty much only come from China and the mining operations there are kind of horror shows.

      • HorriblePerson@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        That technology is nowhere near mature enough to provide a solution to the mentioned problems in the next decade or two.

        • Ænima@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Well of course not, now. I never said it would fix the now problems we face. Had we started in the 1950s, or even the 70s, the impact of climate change would have been negligible and likely mitigated entirely by changes to society that we can’t possibly speculate given our current world. Unfortunately, money and greed played yet another part in destroying our futures by those who won’t be around to see what they’ve done or simply don’t care.

    • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s almost like many things operate exactly like that but don’t have people spreading disinformation or fearmongering to the point where people are so pants shittingly terrified of them they won’t even consider it.

      • TheBaldFox@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 months ago

        Yeah, fossil fuel companies have spent the last 70 years propagandizing against nuclear because it’s their largest threat.

        • Knusper@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Sure, but hopefully you have no trouble believing that simultaneously, nuclear power companies and governments wanting to use nuclear, despite the risks, have been propagandizing for nuclear.

          Pro-nuclear folks are often completely unaccepting of there being risks and externalized costs, which feels to me like they’re subject to propaganda (notwithstanding that I’m likely subject to different propaganda).