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

    Nuclear is the best option. It’s the cheapest when considering the energy output, most environmentally friendly, and takes up the least amount of space.

    It’s the most environmentally friendly, if you don’t consider that it is not renewable and that there are no waste management solutions for the highly radioactive waste.

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

      It not being renewable doesn’t really matter when talking about its CO2 emissions. And the neat thing is, radioactive waste decays on its own so the “waste management” needed is to bury it somewhere and leave it there. It ain’t that complicated.

      • Sheeprevenge@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s a bit more complicated. Where are you gonna bury it? It has to be somewhere, where normally nobody is. Also you have to keep the waste containers safe (and in one piece) for a very, very long time. How are you gonna mark it that people thousands of years in the future still know that it is dangerous?

    • Hyperi0n@lemmy.film
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is a giant hole in a mountain specifically for the purpose of waste disposal.