After 48 years, Democrats endorse nuclear energy in platform

Post by dtech » Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 8:54 PM UTC

eecc wrote: post #58

rectang wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every time I've seen one of these threads on HN asserting that nuclear is safer than the alternatives and I've looked more closely into the claims, I've wound up unconvinced because of omissions like the one you've identified. It's gotten to the point that I tend to tune out pro-nuclear arguments on HN. :( I'm sure there are good arguments in there somewhere, but I don't have the bandwidth to sort them out from the m…

I still haven't heard a convincing protocol for long term storage of spent fuel. That's even worse than a remotely possible nuclear disaster: because unless a solution is found, it's a certainty.

Post by RhysU » Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 8:55 PM UTC

schoen wrote: post #21

sg47 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I stand corrected then. I wonder why for a cohort that doesn't believe in science.

"Doesn't believe in science" is pretty reductionist here. Most Democrats and Republicans, like everyone else, is operating with heuristics about which risks are especially salient and concerning. Those heuristics are influenced by social biases. Democrats are more likely to be enthusiastic about the practice of science than Republicans, but that doesn't mean that Democrats always carefully and dispassionately weigh r…

Post by legulere » Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 8:57 PM UTC

reincarnate0x14 wrote: post #19

melling wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now we just need to make it affordable. Cost overruns seem to be a big problem in the industry. The US recently canceled 2 plants, and we’re struggling to finish the other 2.

Building it makes it affordable. Giant one-off projects have endemic problems with perverse bidding incentives, cost overruns, and engineering problems. Economy of scale production absolutely dominates most industrial supply chains and engineering. The US and other modern economies got the political will together to subsidize solar when it rarely made sense on a MW/$ basis and now it's dropped to by far the cheapest…

Post by cbmuser » Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 8:59 PM UTC

burfog wrote: post #79

eecc wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still haven't heard a convincing protocol for long term storage of spent fuel. That's even worse than a remotely possible nuclear disaster: because unless a solution is found, it's a certainty.

The real answer is mostly "don't do that". Spent fuel rods can't be used anymore because about 5% of the uranium has been converted into elements that slow down the reaction. The remaining uranium is still good. Due to a presidential order by Carter, we waste that uranium. The process for recovering the unused uranium (called "reprocessing") is vaguely similar to the process for making bombs. We'd rather not have lot…

Post by RhysU » Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 9:00 PM UTC

cure wrote: post #62

erikerikson wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may need to get to know more Republicans. Yes, they host a fair bit of anti-climate science sentiment. Democrats host a fair bit of homeopathic sentiment. Both persuasions include competent scientists. Republicans are no more unidimensional than Democrats. In my observation, the conversations between them are far more tribal fueding than epistemological clarification: epistemology is just a prop. It seems to me t…

> It seems to me that when we allow ourselves to be distracted by the category conflicts, we are distracted from the fight between those trying to maximize our well-being and those happy to throw us all under the bus to optimize for their individual circumstance. That's a reasonable point I agree with. But you're just practicing bothsideism here. It is quite obvious that the ones throwing everyone under the bus to op…