this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2023
1622 points (99.9% liked)

Technology

59574 readers
3118 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 content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  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, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

First U.S. nuclear reactor built from scratch in decades enters commercial operation in Georgia::ATLANTA — A new reactor at a nuclear power plant in Georgia has entered commercial operation, becoming the first new American reactor built from scratch in decades.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] schroedingershat@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Monocrystalline solar doesn't involve rare earths at all, idiot.

If you want to pearl clutch about them, pearl clutch about gadolinium in nuclear plants.

[–] doggle@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They aren't pearl clutching, they're stating the obvious fact that humanity is pumping out solar panels as fast as macroeconomic (or perhaps geographic) forces will allow.

Monocrystalline panels take quite a lot of pure silicon, which may not technically be rare earth, but it is in quite high demand right now.

[–] schroedingershat@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

This is even more ridiculous.

It's sand. Literally the most abundant element in earth's crust. And quartz sand isn't even as particular as construction sand, because only the composition is important, not the shape.

You're literally pearl clutching about the scarcity of Silicon as a way of justifying calling it a rare earth.

The only limitation is manufacturing, and you can build manufacturing and the output faster than you can build a nuclear reactor. You're also comparing an industry that's adding >300TWh/yr to one that is adding zero net (and about 20TWh/yr gross) as if the latter is significant and the former is not.

The insane reaches that nukebros go to to justify their insanity would be comical if it wasn't so harmful.