My impression is that this is a PR push, designed to avoid having to invest in renewables, and let them keep on burning gas and coal, rather than something likely to come to fruition.

  • SelfProgrammed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Nuclear is a good option but calling it emission-free is glossing over a pretty big problem we haven’t solved yet.

    • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Even if they don’t burn fossils, the steel and concrete alone emits thousands/millions of tons of GHG’s; every project.

      I guarantee the mining and refinement of fissile material is also extremely energy and water intensive, and I wouldn’t be surprised if most of those embodied GHG’s are ignored or criminally underreported.