this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2026
302 points (91.5% liked)

Technology

87598 readers
4071 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Captain_Stupid@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Dude you are being handed the obvious pro and contra points in this thread if you do not take them serious I doubt it makes sense continuing to argue on the internet about this topic.

[–] wholookshere@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Not them, but having read this entire thread, what contra points?

Other than that, I haven't seen much in this thread.

I see a few points of how Frances configuration for cooling may not be good, but that's not an unsolvable problem?

At least more solvable than the energy storage problem.

Physicist, not an engineer.

You need baseline and demand power.

Renewables like wind and solar are great for demand. As they provide power typically when usuage is peaking. But those power outputs drop when its needed most, so you still need baseline power.

Nuclear power is great at baseline, but because it takes a lot to ramp power up and down, isnt great to handle peak loads.

Notice the team up here?

Why is it always renewables or nuclear. Both have their places.

This solves the energy storage problems as well. Less of a need for batteries with rare earth metals that are.... Finite.

[–] sem@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

From OG comment, contra points, formatted in a bulleted list:

  • Can't handle oncoming increasing heatwaves
  • Regularly have major accidents. source (german)
  • in the age of wind and solar and cheap batteries it is not necessary and much cheaper to build renewables.
[–] wholookshere@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Gonna need a source on the age of cheap batteries.

All large scale batteries are chack full of rare earth metals, which are not named for their famous availability.

[–] sem@piefed.blahaj.zone 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I am just providing the contra points you did not notice earlier. I am not here to defend them.

We could talk about the new infrastructure size sodium ion batteries which use only the most available elements. But again, i am not here to discuss, just to show you that you missed the points in the original comment.

I mean sure.

But I'll also point out the comment wasn't there wasn't any reason, but a logically sound one.

Hence why I said its not logically sound to say era of cheap battery storage, because thats not our current reality.

So sure, there's other points, but none worth discussing?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)