• cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    It takes a long time to get a nuclear plant up and running. While it would be great to replace coal plants with nuclear, it wouldn’t help with all of the power being wasted on AI right now.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Time…

      And a lot of concrete.

      It takes a long time to see the climate gains from a nuclear reactor.

      Hell, depending on size it can take a decade or longer to finish curing, and part of curing is releasing CO2 into the atmosphere.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Nuclear waste isnt that big of an issue.

          That part is kind of overblown.

          Hell, for nuclear waste from naval nuclear reactors, I’m pretty sure we still sell it to France. I know we did up to at least a decade ago. They just refine it again and keep using it.

          If it’s radioactive nuclear waste, that means it’s still radioactive.

          All you gotta do is get rid of the non radioactive bits and it’s fuel again. By the time you can’t do it anymore due to prohibitive cost to gain ratio, it’s not a big problem to get rid of it, because it’s not that radioactive

            • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              I mean yeah…

              Because that part should be…

              I mean, statistically speaking I’m probably the only person that will see this thread that had the US government drop over six figures on teaching nuclear engineering…

              But feel to do some googling about reusing spent fuel to verify for yourself.