• bitteroldcoot@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    Low monetary cost, or low environmental cost?

    Edit: Read the article, it sounds like it’s a closed loop system that should be environmentally safe. But it can’t be that easy. They make it seem like they found the holy grail. Nothing is ever this easy and good. Prove me wrong?

    • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 days ago

      It might be. Fluorine chemistry is not exactly the most widely researched avenue simply due to the inherent danger of it.

      I’m hopeful. A lot of true breakthroughs are relatively simple and seemingly obvious in hindsight.

      • Lemmy World@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        10 days ago

        Agreed. We made the nuke before the compound bow because precision machining wasn’t that easy to do, but one we got it down, tools changed rapidly.

    • frongt@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 days ago

      It’s probably more expensive. But they can also probably improve the process to make it more competitive.