Bill Gates-backed nuclear contender Terra Power aims to build dozens of UK reactors::A Bill Gates-backed clean energy player is hoping to build dozens of nuclear reactors in the UK and will compete with global rivals.

  • zer0@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    30
    ·
    1 year ago

    We don’t need more nuclear power to mitigate the climate disaster we need to stop endless consumerism and strip of power these who got us here.

    • Latuga17@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Would you prefer using oil or gas instead? If we are going to transition away from fossil fuels, nuclear will have to be a part of our new generation system.

      • zer0@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        I would prefer using renewable sources and cutting off the useless shit like private jets

        • p1mrx@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The world would be a bit better if everyone flew coach or stayed home, but it would be a lot better if the developing world had access to lighting, air conditioning, washing machines, transportation, fertilizer, and desalinated water without a corresponding increase in carbon emissions.

          Renewables (with storage and long-distance transmission) are part of the solution, but we need to invest in all viable forms of carbon-free energy like there’s no tomorrow, because if we don’t, then for a lot of people there won’t be.

          • zer0@thelemmy.club
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            1 year ago

            The world can’t be better if the plan is to make things worst (planned obsolescence). Feeding these who got us there is not a solution to the problem

            • p1mrx@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I agree that we should build more durable technology and reduce income inequality, but we need to fight the laws of physics first. Debate is a luxury granted by a stable civilization, which largely depends on a stable climate.

                • p1mrx@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Investing in nuclear power also means allowing engineers to improve the technology. There are plenty of reactor designs (mostly on paper) that can safely shut down without human intervention, which would make them much less of a liability in a warzone.

                  • gnygnygny@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    All of them will increase waste by 30% and will not make a cheaper energy.

                • Serinus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Let’s save downvotes for comments that don’t contribute (like zer0’s first few).

                  While I still disagree with his later stuff, it’s certainly more productive of a conversation.

                  I realize downvote != disagree is a fight we can never win, but it’s still worth trying.

            • Daefsdeda@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I definitely agree with you on how planned obsolescence and consumerism is a huge issue. But we still need energy from something and this sounds like a great start.

              I’m all about the three R’s. Especially prioritizing the order they are in.

              REDUCE and REUSE first, recycle only if needed.

    • bangover @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      We need to do both of those things. Mindless consumerism aside, the best option to solve our base energy needs which are not frivolous (infrastructure, healthcare, education etc etc) is nuclear.