• Pasta Dental
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    It definitely is amongst the cleanest energy sources we have today, especially when the choice for most is either oil, coal or nuclear, the choice is easy. Hydro, solar or wind are often not viable because of climate or location reasons. Not to mention that all of these need to be built using concrete, that is not unique to nuclear. Also important is that hydro electricity also dramatically alters the area, killing many animals and moving many species out of their home.

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      You don’t need much concrete for wind, and only a single slab for the solar transformer.

      The problem is the assumption that the datacenter must be running at 100% power 24/7

    • hendrik@palaver.p3x.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Btw, wind turbines aren’t made of concrete, the towers are metal tubes. But the blades are problematic, since they’re made from fiberglass. And solar panels aren’t concrete either. While - if I drive past a nuclear power plant, those are really huge concrete structures. And the problematic things about hydro plants are the reservoirs. It’s flooding a vast area to build a new reservoir and changing the flow in the river that destroys ecosystems. The plant itself isn’t that bad. So ideally you build it into an existing flow of water or use tidal energy instead of building a new dam. And that concern wouldn’t apply. I’m not an expert on north american geography, but I bet there are some opportunities left for power plants with a lesser impact on the ecosystem.