this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2025
53 points (100.0% liked)

science

23229 readers
751 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Crankenstein@lemmy.world -2 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Don't see any reasons why it can't and plenty of reasons why it should.

[–] pulsey@feddit.org 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Too expensive and thus a too heavy burden on society while much cheaper alternatives exist.

[–] Crankenstein@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

"expensive"

How? In what terms?

Because during my studies in conservation, the only barrier of "expensive" is monetary cost which is entirely societal systems of arbitrary monetary value which has nothing to do with the actual material or labor costs.

Is it actually a burden on society or simply a burden on the interests of private industry?