Steep decline in nuclear power would threaten energy security and climate goals
1–10 of 248 posts
Re: Steep decline in nuclear power would threaten energy security and climate goals
#2Yeah.
But lets get rid of nukes when battery storage, solar and wind are plentiful.
No new nukes. The $billions can be spent better elsewhere. That goes for fusion too.
Re: Steep decline in nuclear power would threaten energy security and climate goals
#3I grew up in San Diego. I have seen a very encouraging amount of solar deployment on houses there. But there is still a massive potential for more residential solar.
When I visited my brother in Ft. Worth I saw almost no residential solar. I also noticed that there was a massive supply of wind blowing around the neighborhood.
Is it really not feasible to harness solar and wind better? Maybe it requires moving to a more distributed system with suburbia becoming much less dependant on the power companies.
To me you just really need to be sure it's not feasible to do it with solar and wind before you get too serious about reviving the nuclear power industry.
Re: Steep decline in nuclear power would threaten energy security and climate goals
#4Haven't nuclear waste recycling and safety features gotten really good in the past few decades? I feel like not many people know just how little waste is created with modern recycling and just how safe nuclear is with modern safety features.
Seems like we need a positive PR campaign to help convince folks that nuclear is way better than fossil fuels. This could easily be bipartisan.
Re: Steep decline in nuclear power would threaten energy security and climate goals
#5I grew up in San Diego. I have seen a very encouraging amount of solar deployment on houses there. But there is still a massive potential for more residential solar. When I visited my brother in Ft. Worth I saw almost no residential solar. I also noticed that there was a massive supply of wind blowing around the neighborhood. Is it really not feasible to harness solar and wind better? Maybe it requires moving to a mo…
Given the lead time required to bring new nuclear generation capacity online, it probably makes more sense the other way around: before you get too serious about letting the nuclear power industry die, you just really need to be sure it's feasible to replace it with solar and wind.
(I don't love that nuclear reactors, as opposed to the turbines that generate electricity from the steam they produce, should be in the hands of industry at all; having a profit motive involved in such a safety-critical set of processes is a recipe for disaster. Given a choice between for-profit nuclear reactors and not-for-profit ones, I'll take the second every time. But given the criticality of reliable baseload supply to so many of the processes that support the style of societies on which we've grown so dependent, if we have to choose between for-profit reactors, with all the attendant problems, and no reactors at all - we may very well still be better off with the former than the latter.)
Re: Steep decline in nuclear power would threaten energy security and climate goals
#6I grew up in San Diego. I have seen a very encouraging amount of solar deployment on houses there. But there is still a massive potential for more residential solar. When I visited my brother in Ft. Worth I saw almost no residential solar. I also noticed that there was a massive supply of wind blowing around the neighborhood. Is it really not feasible to harness solar and wind better? Maybe it requires moving to a mo…
I think you have the onus of responsibility backwards. Nuclear power's ability to achieve the amount and type of energy production appropriate for today's energy usage patterns is proven.
We should be determining the feasibility of scaling solar and wind energy production, creating enough multi-scale storage, and long distance load balancing, and demand shaping before winding down nuclear.
I think it's obvious that we need to do both. Nuclear plants have a lifespan of ~50 years. Reaching and sustaining zero carbon lifestyle isn't a one time occurrence, it'll be an on-going journey for centuries. We'll have plenty of opportunities later to drawdown nuclear.
Re: Steep decline in nuclear power would threaten energy security and climate goals
#7Haven't nuclear waste recycling and safety features gotten really good in the past few decades? I feel like not many people know just how little waste is created with modern recycling and just how safe nuclear is with modern safety features. Seems like we need a positive PR campaign to help convince folks that nuclear is way better than fossil fuels. This could easily be bipartisan.
Greenpeace has successfully spent several decades painting nuclear power as Evil so its going to be difficult to convince voters to support it from now on.
Re: Steep decline in nuclear power would threaten energy security and climate goals
#8So many people are grossly unaware of nuclear power and it's potential vs its risks. Many people in the USA live much closer to a nuclear power plant than they realize. It has huge potential but its scare factor keep it from widespread adoption.
Re: Steep decline in nuclear power would threaten energy security and climate goals
#9Haven't nuclear waste recycling and safety features gotten really good in the past few decades? I feel like not many people know just how little waste is created with modern recycling and just how safe nuclear is with modern safety features. Seems like we need a positive PR campaign to help convince folks that nuclear is way better than fossil fuels. This could easily be bipartisan.
What do they do with the little waste?
Re: Steep decline in nuclear power would threaten energy security and climate goals
#10I grew up in San Diego. I have seen a very encouraging amount of solar deployment on houses there. But there is still a massive potential for more residential solar. When I visited my brother in Ft. Worth I saw almost no residential solar. I also noticed that there was a massive supply of wind blowing around the neighborhood. Is it really not feasible to harness solar and wind better? Maybe it requires moving to a mo…
Ft Worth is fed by a massive supply of cheap wind energy from West Texas as well as natural gas and coal plants. Roof top solar isn't that viable here. Not many people want a $20-30k installation on top of a $200-400k house and the energy prices just aren't high enough to substantiate it.