this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2025
522 points (98.2% liked)

Technology

62073 readers
4991 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Mihies@programming.dev -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Nuclear is reliable, predictable and stable 24/7 source. Solar not so much and possibly not that great for the environment if we don't figure out what to do with used solar panels. Also their production is not exactly clean. Whereas nuclear requires a wasted fuel storage somewhere and the fuel will eventually run out of radiation in some hundreds of thousands years.

[–] Schorsch@feddit.org 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Storing something extremely dangerous extremely safely for "some hundreds of thousands of years" doesn't exactly sound cheap, does it?

[–] Mihies@programming.dev -1 points 4 hours ago

Not that expensive either. And that's already included in the energy price. Also volume is magnitudes smaller than used solar panels.