this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2026
298 points (90.7% liked)

Technology

87390 readers
4115 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] blueworld@piefed.world 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

While they did well environmental to produce this and even from a cost to consumer, there are many hidden costs to the power produced which will test France in the coming years as their fleet of reactors and the coming debt-to-gdp crisis means the tens of billions required to overhaul it might be tough to subsidize.

[–] gandalf_der_13te@feddit.org 1 points 4 days ago

debt-to-gdp crisis

is not an actual crisis, money on those political levels doesn't work the same way as it would for households.

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 3 points 5 days ago

id suggest Fiji, New Zealand, New Guinea, Cambodia and many dozen other countries will have much lower emissions. in their Navy.

[–] nibbles@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 days ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 days ago (12 children)

lowest-carbon

Ok, now do nuclear waste.

[–] RamRabbit@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

You are talking about input materials for reactor fuel. We are told almost daily about how bad climate change is; why would new fuel inputs be anything notable as nuclear power de-carbonizes the grid?

[–] rollerbang@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago

I didn't check, does it say that waste management is not included?

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Sniatch@feddit.org -5 points 3 days ago

Too bad this also slows down their renewable energy projects, which would make it cheaper. But Nuclear Reactors + renewables is a bad combination. Nuclear Reactors can't be adjusted to renewable energy, because you can't just shut them down when the renewables producing lots of cheap energy. Nuclear Plants always have to keep running, which is also expensive.

[–] ccunix@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (8 children)

Unfortunately, thanks to the anti-nuclear lobby, we are in a situation where the current reactors will have to be shutdown before the new ones are available to take their place.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip -4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (3 children)

Because it only replaces a environmental disaster with a future one. Still no (practical) way to handle the waste.

[–] ccunix@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago

Send it to the rain forest

Turns out humans are worse than radiation

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›