• Long-term nuclear waste doesn’t take up huge amounts of space in the grand scheme of things. And while renewables are essential, having a nuclear backbone in the mix is going to be needed for times of lower output. Otherwise you’d need huge amounts of batteries which would drive up the cost again and slow down the move to zero fossil fuels.

    •  klisklas   ( @klisklas@feddit.de ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I am from Germany. We have been looking for an “Endlager” (place to store the waste up to a million years safely) since the beginning of using nuclear energy and we haven’t found one. No one wants to have one in ones vicinity and the place where we are storing it now (Asse) is leaking. Times when the sun does not shine and there are no winds are rare and there are more options to store energy than batteries. What we need are better power grids to meet demands during those difficult times and harvest the renewable energy more efficient.

      Plus, where does the uranium come from, that for example France uses? Russia (dictatorship), Kazakhstan and Niger (military coup). The sun and the wind don’t attack sovereign nations, don’t write an invoice and cannot pressure you to do a moral limbo when it comes to your energy resources.

      •  Elliemac   ( @Elliemac@aussie.zone ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        210 months ago

        It’s stupid because here in Australia we have the size of Western Europe as desert that won’t ever be used for anything. We already have ports and roads in and nuclear testing has already taken place in the desert.

        •  sic_1   ( @sic_1@feddit.de ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          110 months ago

          Yet, somehow that area isn’t used as global mass storage for everyone’s nuclear waste despite decades of every nation with nuclear plants looking for one. I guess complex problems don’t always have simple solutions.