Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Miguelito Loveless

(5,546 posts)
8. Except for the fact that it is still decades away
Tue Jul 28, 2020, 08:38 AM
Jul 2020

just like it has been for the last 60 years.

It is hideously expensive, uses a lot of land, and still required centralized grids.

I am not saying give up on it, but right now we have the tech to de-carbonize the grid. Today. Not 10-50 years from now. Given the dire consequences of global warming, the money being spent on this could be reducing CO2 now. Every house converted takes about 10,000lbs of CO2 out of the atmosphere now. More when you scale up to solar/wind farms.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Nifty. Laelth Jul 2020 #1
That surprises me. no_hypocrisy Jul 2020 #2
Nuclear fission gave us Chernobyl and Fukushima Cirque du So-What Jul 2020 #3
There was no problem at Chernobyl. Yavin4 Jul 2020 #7
... Cirque du So-What Jul 2020 #19
Referring to this: Yavin4 Jul 2020 #20
Was on my watch list Cirque du So-What Jul 2020 #21
You must watch it. Yavin4 Jul 2020 #22
and Three Mile Island lagomorph777 Jul 2020 #11
Fusion beats Fission Coleman Jul 2020 #5
fusion will be a much safer source of energy mdbl Jul 2020 #9
Fission, or initiating a nuclear chain reaction by "splitting" the atom produces much less energy Nitram Jul 2020 #18
I prefer the fusion reactor I've been using for the last 5 years Miguelito Loveless Jul 2020 #4
+1. But fusion power will undoubtedly have uses too. . . . nt Bernardo de La Paz Jul 2020 #6
Except for the fact that it is still decades away Miguelito Loveless Jul 2020 #8
It does seem a bit odd not to exploit the reactor we already have. lagomorph777 Jul 2020 #10
Precisely! Miguelito Loveless Jul 2020 #14
It's only good for about another 7.59 billion years though NEOBuckeye Jul 2020 #12
Actually, for us, Miguelito Loveless Jul 2020 #13
Sooner than that: more like 0.5 billion years of good times. lagomorph777 Jul 2020 #15
Well, I figured we would adapt until the sun expanded enough to engulf us Miguelito Loveless Jul 2020 #16
Before the present 6th Mass Extinction Event, lagomorph777 Jul 2020 #17
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»World's largest nuclear f...»Reply #8