- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- nyt_gift_articles
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- nyt_gift_articles
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.
Nuclear is a good option but calling it emission-free is glossing over a pretty big problem we haven’t solved yet.
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.