this post was submitted on 14 May 2026
605 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

84731 readers
4804 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world 88 points 3 days ago (32 children)

I want to say "no shit" but then I remembered that most people have no idea how safe nuclear reactors actually are

[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 50 points 3 days ago (15 children)

There's a huge anti-nuclear crowd, I'd prefer we focus on renewables as much as possible but it's stupid not to phase out oil/gas for nuclear as a more consistent source.

[–] CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world 27 points 3 days ago (10 children)

There's a huge anti-nuclear crowd

Which was grass-rooted by oil companies back in the 70s.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

astroturfed. Because it's fake grass-roots.

[–] Jaycifer@piefed.social 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Wait, is that what astroturfing refers to?! That makes so much sense now.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 days ago

Yeah, I learned it after years of seeing it on reddit, because someone finally explained it lol

[–] CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Yes! That's the term I was trying to think of.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] zurohki@aussie.zone 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I'm anti-nuclear, but it's because nuclear is so much slower to build and more expensive than solar or wind so the fossil fuel industry is pushing for nuclear to delay the transition away from fossil fuels and use up all the funding.

If you have nuclear plants, you've paid to build them and you're on the hook for decommissioning costs, sure, keep running them. Starting construction on new nuclear in 2026? That's a terrible idea.

You won't be up and running before 2040 and you're not going to be competitive against 2040's renewables and batteries, never mind 2070's.

[–] Rakonat@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago (4 children)

The 20+ year time to build is at best the direct result of lobbying and NIMBY and realistically just propoganda by antinuclear. The US mean for nuclear construction to production is 8 years. Japan has it down to under 5.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 days ago (7 children)

China is building them in 5-6 years, the best time to plant a tree was 30 years ago and the second best time is now.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[–] starblursd@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Well when annoying orange decided to cut the safety regulations on nuclear they became a bit more sketchy but yeah still would rather have that than a data center... One benefits all and the other benefits shareholders feelings till the bubble pops

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (30 replies)