• Instigate
    link
    fedilink
    168 months ago

    Particularly nuclear fusion, which doesn’t generate long-lived radioactive isotopes as byproducts of energy production. Nuclear fission still has a place to be sure, but once we crack the dilemmas with fusion all bets are off when it comes to generating huge amounts of clean energy.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      188 months ago

      Fission gets a bad rap. The amount of waste it produces is minuscule compared to the amount of waste generated by fossil fuels, and it’s generally easier to deal with too. Just needs actual proper maintenance and care.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            28 months ago

            You say that but that’s practically Australia in a nutshell, nuclear is explicitly banned for the purposes of energy production

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              2
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              The coal plants are decommissioning due to costs, renewable energy is booming, and (obviously due to the ban) there is no local nuclear industry or expertise. Even if you manage to lift the ban, which nobody is trying to do*, nuclear would not be replacing coal plants here, but might divert renewable funding. In other countries I have no doubt building more nuclear could offset coal, not here.

              * The coalition claims to be in favour of nuclear power, but they’ve spruiked it before in opposition, and nothing gets tabled when they’re in power. It’s got as much chance of happening as high speed rail.

      • Jojo
        link
        fedilink
        18 months ago

        Biggest and just about onliest problem with nuclear fission is how expensive it is to dry it up, both in terms of time and money.

      • @Harbinger01173430
        link
        18 months ago

        Besides, we can always just call in Godzilla to eat up the radiation