• moitoi@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    Na it’s dumb. The issue with the magic rocks isn’t the direct consequences like with the fire. The issues with these rocks are long terms with the consequences on humans and the environment thousands of years later.

    • dev_null@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Yeah, the environmental issues that are orders of magnitude less problematic than literally pumping the toxic chemicals into the atmosphere like with fossil fuels, vs comparatively miniscule amount of solid waste to store inert.

      • T156@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Coal smoke is more radioactive than the outside of a fission reactor anyhow.

    • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      What consequences?
      There are no consequences for animals in Chernobyl, they are thriving in all aspects, even mammals living underground (mutations are fiction).

      People that didn’t leave the exclusion zone died of old age there.

      Life on Earth had to deal with all sorts of radiation.

      What caused mass extinction was ecosystem change, eg via global climate change.

    • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 hours ago

      these rocks are long terms with the consequences on humans and the environment thousands of years later.

      You bury them in concrete, done. Nuclear waste isn’t an issue and hasn’t ever been