Have we figured out how to store or process nuclear waste safely? I have vaguely uneasy recollection of reading about American nuclear waste.
Nuclear power is the best climate-change solution
211–220 of 354 posts
Re: Nuclear power is the best climate-change solution
#212Have we figured out how to store or process nuclear waste safely? I have vaguely uneasy recollection of reading about American nuclear waste.
Honestly, that’s not the actual problem. Waste is basically solved already. I am very pro-nuclear, but if I were to steelman the anti-nuclear argument, it’d be proliferation concerns.
Re: Nuclear power is the best climate-change solution
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thrust was correct according to your source, or am I misreading it? Nuclear median 12, Solar 48 (4x nuclear), gas 490 (10x solar), coal 810 (20x solar).
Yes, it was, however this dates back 2014 and solar recycling is progressing, and becomes more and more legally mandatory in industrialized nations. Solar panels: operators now reach ~80% recycling (glass, metal, silicon, plastic). Wind turbines recycling is also quickly progressing.
Nuclear waste recycling is also progressing.
Re: Nuclear power is the best climate-change solution
#214Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The moment people blame things on tree huggers https://www.encyclopedia.com/environment/educational-magazin... The late 1960s through 1980s saw a shift in the antinuclear movement toward protesting the development of nuclear power as an energy source. The antinuclear movement succeeded in virtually halting the governments' development of nuclear power.
How does one manage to stop nuclear energy but not fossil fuel use? These are arguably the same sorts of groups, with probably a large overlap. How did they have such power in one area, but not in another? If there is lack of lobbyist or industry pressure pushing for it, then we have to wonder why? Nuclear isn't cost effective as a business is the likely answer, and under our current system that drives most of the de…
I think people freak out much more easily when imagining a Hiroshima or Chernobyl or Fukushima in their home towns than when trying to picture the slow but unrelenting worsening of climate conditions over time caused by fossil burning, even though the former is local and unlikely and the latter is global and certain.
Re: Nuclear power is the best climate-change solution
#215Not true, it's too late for nuclear power. Additionally it is quite expensive compared to renewables and makes the burden on future generations even bigger. Anyway, don't shut down any working plant early... We need everything we have atm
Nuclear costs, particularly in high latitude countries like most of Europe, are pretty reasonable and competitive in a future where you’re 100% decarbonized. Renewables are cheaper if we are just 80% decarbonized. Check it: https://model.energy
The cost is also HIGHLY dependent on time to complete. And a big part of that time, besides contractor inexperience because we don’t build them much any more, is the constant battles with activists and environmental groups and NIMBYs
Re: Nuclear power is the best climate-change solution
#216Looks like this opinion doesn't matter much: the last operational nuclear plant in California is closing in a few years.
Re: Nuclear power is the best climate-change solution
#217Have we figured out how to store or process nuclear waste safely? I have vaguely uneasy recollection of reading about American nuclear waste.
We definitely know how to do it. We just have to get people to agree to do it. We are supposed to put it in Yucca Mtn but that is stalled out politically.
Finland, meanwhile, is proceeding with their equivalent at Onkalo.
Re: Nuclear power is the best climate-change solution
#218Nuclear is one of a number of alternatives that needs to be seriously considered but due to the long timelines and high costs of nuclear it is also one of the best stalling tactics for the fossil fuel industry seeking to extend the life of their assets. Possible increased adoption of nuclear in the future is not a reason to avoid setting sunset dates for emitting technologies now and commence transition to whatever l…
We can't afford to wait or not to hedge our bets. Nuclear is a hell of a hedge since we know it works. We know the French model works really well, but for some reason we, the country with the most heavily armed forces in the world, can't "protect" it. BS, moneyed interests and tree huggers are keeping us from fixing the problem until fusion comes along or uber cheap battery density 100x better than what we have curre…
[deleted]
Re: Nuclear power is the best climate-change solution
#219It's bullshit. Electricity is only 28% of global emissions. What about the other 3/4ths? And on that 28%... The Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) has accurately estimated the planet's economically accessible uranium resources, reactors could run more than 200 years at current rates of consumption. Nuclear energy now provides about 10% of the world’s electricity from about 445 power reactors. This isn't hard math.
> Electricity is only 28% of global emissions. What about the other 3/4ths? How much of fixing the other 3/4ths requires more electricity to substitute? > The Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) has accurately estimated the planet's economically accessible uranium resources, reactors could run more than 200 years at current rates of consumption. Or it could be as much as 4 billion years. https://whatisnuclear.com/blog/2020-1…
Indeed! Nuclear breeder reactors, which have been the long-term plan all along, are just as sustainable as wind and solar on Earth. It's sad how many people have forgotten about breeder reactors. One of the first reactors ever built on the planet was designed to prove that breeding was possible, which it did in 1952. [1]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_Breeder_Reactor_I
Plus, nuclear makes heat and electricity. The heat can be used to help with building heating directly with conventional reactors, and can help with industrial processes as well. Higher-temperature reactors can more directly handle industrial process heat.
Re: Nuclear power is the best climate-change solution
#220Haven't read the paywalled article but the idea that nuclear is clean compared to coal is ridiculous as evidenced by Chernobyl and Fukushima and Three Mile Island and Windscale. Nuclear pollution is about 1 trillion trillion times worse than coal and is sufficiently common - roughly one major nuclear accident per decade to be non-negligible. It's not safe to assume nuclear power is getting safer when terrorism and na…
Including all accidents mentioned, nuclear energy is a few hundred times safer than coal, per TWh generated [1].
In fact, air pollution from fossil and biofuel combustion kills as many people that died and will die from Chernobyl (around 4000) every 7.5 hours, and counting. When you dig into the data, nuclear is shockingly safe. And that's not even considering climate change impacts, where nuclear is about as low carbon as you can get, in the full lifecycle.