6 ms·

Batteries in their current form are incredibly harmful to the environment, and I think would need to be replaced more than nuclear fuel sources.

by slenk 4y ago

Elyra 4y ago
Exactly, and the reason why they're cheaper now is because it's easier to dump their externalities on developing countries with lax environmental policy, whereas nuclear has unreasonably strict safety requirements which drive up costs substantially, along with the lost expertise in the work force by pausing it for so long.
- throwuwu 4y ago
  TANSTAAFL
bryanlarsen 4y ago
Batteries, if recycled, have less environmental impact than the massive amounts of concrete used in a nuclear facility.
- DrThunder 4y ago
  Absolutely not. You might want to look up where that cobalt for batteries comes from as well and how much recycling actually gets done.
  - jeffbee 4y ago
    LiFePO4 batteries need no cobalt. You do not need fancy batteries for stationary services. Grid-scale storage batteries can be as big, heavy, dumb, and cheap as you like. You don't even need lithium really.
    - DrThunder 4y ago
      Cool. Would you like to let us know where all the other materials are mined from and how environmentally friendly that is? I suggest you look up nickel mining.
      - bryanlarsen 4y ago
        LiFePO4 batteries don't use nickel either.
        DrThunder 4y ago
        I see that now. Yes, they seem to be a better option than other batteries. However, you're still mining stuff from the earth and the idea that disposing of current vehicles (or other fossil fuel powered things) is better for the environment is just silly. You also didn't address the recyclable part. From what I can see LiFePO4 batteries are supposedly easier to recycle but I'm going to take that with a grain of salt. Almost all the things they've told us are being recycled just get dumped in the ocean in China. I have my doubts that anyone is actually recycling these batteries effectively.
        bryanlarsen 4y ago
        > Almost all the things they've told us are being recycled just get dumped in the ocean in China. Post-consumer recycling is quite poor, but post-industrial recycling is much better because they don't have to sort out random junk. Many battery plants already recycle the batteries that fail validation. Cars are recycled quite thoroughly. In the US: 99% of lead acid batteries are recycled. 95% of vehicles are recycled, and of those 95%, 80% of the materials in the vehicle are recycled. (mostly steel).
  - bryanlarsen 4y ago
    In 2023 stationary storage batteries don't use cobalt. Stationary storage batteries are expected to last 25 years. Given that we've only been doing stationary storage batteries for about 5 years, it's not really surprising that they aren't being recycled.
    - DrThunder 4y ago
      What's your point here? You're only supporting my stance.
jeffbee 4y ago
This lie is promulgated by the oil industry.
- DrThunder 4y ago
  The oil industry uses slave labor to mine cobalt in the congo with zero environmental concerns on how they get it out of the ground? Your lie is promulgated by the "green energy" industry. There's just as much money and bs coming from the other side. You can't pretend there's not when you have massive donors and and entire elitist political party backing something like that.
  - jeffbee 4y ago
    You have fallen into a trap. You are informed enough to be concern-trolled by fossil fuel propaganda, but not well-enough informed to realize it. Many battery technologies need no fancy metals. Even lithium is optional. But lithium, even if we have to get it, has an environmental footprint far smaller than fossil fuels production. Other things that have dramatically larger environmental footprints than lithium include soap and table salt.
    - DrThunder 4y ago
      Oh stop with the strawman attacks and wake up. You're being fed bs by your side just as much as the oil industry feeds their "constituents" lies. Big Green energy is backed by massive amounts of money and political interests just like big oil and it's not even close to replacing fossil fuels as a main energy source. All you need to do is ask Europe how things are going now that they don't have natural gas coming in from Russia. Here's the deal... right now, fossil fuels heat my home, get me to work, cook my food, create a massive amount of the household products I own. They've kept my family alive and well and several generations back as well. Green Energy CAN'T do this effectively at all right now. If/When it does I'll switch. However, I'm not going to listen to some shill, bully and shame me into using something because they feel they're morally justified in doing so.
      - 4y ago
DrThunder 4y ago
Yep... and the cobalt they need to in order to be produced it mined by child slave labor in the Congo. People need to realize nothing about living in our modern culture comes without a cost.

Batteries in their current form are incredibly harmful to the environment, and I think would need to be replaced more than nuclear fuel sources.

by slenk 4y ago

Batteries in their current form are incredibly harmful to the environment, and I think would need to be replaced more than nuclear fuel sources.

Elyra 4y ago

Exactly, and the reason why they're cheaper now is because it's easier to dump their externalities on developing countries with lax environmental policy, whereas nuclear has unreasonably strict safety requirements which drive up costs substantially, along with the lost expertise in the work force by pausing it for so long.

throwuwu 4y ago
TANSTAAFL

bryanlarsen 4y ago

Batteries, if recycled, have less environmental impact than the massive amounts of concrete used in a nuclear facility.

DrThunder 4y ago
Absolutely not. You might want to look up where that cobalt for batteries comes from as well and how much recycling actually gets done.
- jeffbee 4y ago
  LiFePO4 batteries need no cobalt. You do not need fancy batteries for stationary services. Grid-scale storage batteries can be as big, heavy, dumb, and cheap as you like. You don't even need lithium really.
  - DrThunder 4y ago
    Cool. Would you like to let us know where all the other materials are mined from and how environmentally friendly that is? I suggest you look up nickel mining.
    - bryanlarsen 4y ago
      LiFePO4 batteries don't use nickel either.
      - DrThunder 4y ago
        I see that now. Yes, they seem to be a better option than other batteries. However, you're still mining stuff from the earth and the idea that disposing of current vehicles (or other fossil fuel powered things) is better for the environment is just silly. You also didn't address the recyclable part. From what I can see LiFePO4 batteries are supposedly easier to recycle but I'm going to take that with a grain of salt. Almost all the things they've told us are being recycled just get dumped in the ocean in China. I have my doubts that anyone is actually recycling these batteries effectively.
        bryanlarsen 4y ago
        > Almost all the things they've told us are being recycled just get dumped in the ocean in China. Post-consumer recycling is quite poor, but post-industrial recycling is much better because they don't have to sort out random junk. Many battery plants already recycle the batteries that fail validation. Cars are recycled quite thoroughly. In the US: 99% of lead acid batteries are recycled. 95% of vehicles are recycled, and of those 95%, 80% of the materials in the vehicle are recycled. (mostly steel).
- bryanlarsen 4y ago
  In 2023 stationary storage batteries don't use cobalt. Stationary storage batteries are expected to last 25 years. Given that we've only been doing stationary storage batteries for about 5 years, it's not really surprising that they aren't being recycled.
  - DrThunder 4y ago
    What's your point here? You're only supporting my stance.

jeffbee 4y ago

This lie is promulgated by the oil industry.

DrThunder 4y ago
The oil industry uses slave labor to mine cobalt in the congo with zero environmental concerns on how they get it out of the ground? Your lie is promulgated by the "green energy" industry. There's just as much money and bs coming from the other side. You can't pretend there's not when you have massive donors and and entire elitist political party backing something like that.
- jeffbee 4y ago
  You have fallen into a trap. You are informed enough to be concern-trolled by fossil fuel propaganda, but not well-enough informed to realize it. Many battery technologies need no fancy metals. Even lithium is optional. But lithium, even if we have to get it, has an environmental footprint far smaller than fossil fuels production. Other things that have dramatically larger environmental footprints than lithium include soap and table salt.
  - DrThunder 4y ago
    Oh stop with the strawman attacks and wake up. You're being fed bs by your side just as much as the oil industry feeds their "constituents" lies. Big Green energy is backed by massive amounts of money and political interests just like big oil and it's not even close to replacing fossil fuels as a main energy source. All you need to do is ask Europe how things are going now that they don't have natural gas coming in from Russia. Here's the deal... right now, fossil fuels heat my home, get me to work, cook my food, create a massive amount of the household products I own. They've kept my family alive and well and several generations back as well. Green Energy CAN'T do this effectively at all right now. If/When it does I'll switch. However, I'm not going to listen to some shill, bully and shame me into using something because they feel they're morally justified in doing so.
    - 4y ago

DrThunder 4y ago

Yep... and the cobalt they need to in order to be produced it mined by child slave labor in the Congo. People need to realize nothing about living in our modern culture comes without a cost.