I am not reflexively anti-nuclear. However, I have never heard a satisfactory answer to the simple question: "How do we store nuclear waste safely?"
Why nuclear energy is our best option at the moment
21–30 of 393 posts
Re: Why nuclear energy is our best option at the moment
#221 cm3 of water weighs a lot more than 1 gram ?? From a quick skim through, many of his calcs seem to be based on this i.e. major error.
The weight of one cubic centimeter of water is in fact one gram. By definition.
Re: Why nuclear energy is our best option at the moment
#23I skimmed, but I think this is missing the value of the land that people won't be able to use in case of an accident. A semi-permanent mass evacuation isn't cheap.
Well, we're definitely making the whole planet unusable just by producing energy the way we are today.
Not even counting CO2, yearly coal production is like having nuclear meltdowns all the time. Mercury, uranium, particulates, lead, heavy metals, and arsenic.
Re: Why nuclear energy is our best option at the moment
#241 cm3 of water weighs a lot more than 1 gram ?? From a quick skim through, many of his calcs seem to be based on this i.e. major error.
Uh, maybe if you're talking about heavy water. The density of liquid H2O at standard temperature and pressure is almost exactly 1g/cm^3.
Re: Why nuclear energy is our best option at the moment
#251 cm3 of water weighs a lot more than 1 gram ?? From a quick skim through, many of his calcs seem to be based on this i.e. major error.
1ml = 1cm^3 of water weighs almost exactly 1 gram. A liter of water (1000ml = 1000 cm^3) weighs almost exactly a kilogram. http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=weight%20of%201cm^3%20o...
Re: Why nuclear energy is our best option at the moment
#26I am not reflexively anti-nuclear. However, I have never heard a satisfactory answer to the simple question: "How do we store nuclear waste safely?"
By not hiding it away, but using warehouses that are actively staffed just like the plant that made the waste. Of course these facilities should be secure installations. But the root of the problem is not wanted to actively take ownership responsibility for the waste. I imagine every major city having its secure storage installation.
Consider the scale of waste generated as well. All the waste used to power a life of electrical usage creates was the size of a pea.
Re: Why nuclear energy is our best option at the moment
#271 cm3 of water weighs a lot more than 1 gram ?? From a quick skim through, many of his calcs seem to be based on this i.e. major error.
Article's author also confuses units:
"The entire planet’s electrical consumption is right around 5 terawatt-hours."
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=world+electricity+consu...
Re: Why nuclear energy is our best option at the moment
#28I am not reflexively anti-nuclear. However, I have never heard a satisfactory answer to the simple question: "How do we store nuclear waste safely?"
Everyone brushes over that, the billions of dollars to build a plant, and the ~10 year construction time. Any nuclear power plant that has construction started today won't be cost competitive with renewables when it comes online.
It would be like building a new coal plant in the US today. You simply can't compete with wind, solar, and natural gas (which is still superior to coal, and I don't mind it being a stranded asset for whomever invested in it as solar and wind ramp up).
Re: Why nuclear energy is our best option at the moment
#29It's the sad truth that people seem very for nuclear, but no one wants to live near it. Of course, I've seen articles regarding people who don't want to live near wind turbines, so maybe people are just far to fickle.
People object to living near:
* Nuclear plants (fallout fear)
* Wind turbines (ruins the view, kills birds)
* Offshore wind turbines (ruins the view)
* Coal/oil/gas plants (polluting)
* Hydroelectric (house is now underwater, dam breaking)
* Geothermal (for pretty much the same reasons as fracking)
About the only sources of power that people don't object to are photovoltaic solar and tidal, which produce only piddling amounts of energy (and probably most people don't know enough about tidal to find some reason to object to it).
In truth, no one wants to live near anything that smacks of industry. Even trying to find places to put the trunk power lines or substations can find a lot of resistance, so sticking power plants in the middle of nowhere doesn't really solve the NIMBY problem.
Re: Why nuclear energy is our best option at the moment
#30The biggest problem with nuclear is making the numbers work. You end up paying something like 80% of the cost 1 GW/year * 50 years before you get your first cent in revenue. That's a very tough thing to finance. Cost and especially time overruns during construction can easily tank the project financially. About the only way to make it work is to be a regulated utility that has a long term captured audience for its power. One that's very likely to be the same size or bigger for the next half century. Even there you still have to worry about technological change pulling the carpet out from under you in 20 or 30 years.
That's leaving aside the questions of insurance, local and federal regulatory approval, and waste disposal / decommissioning costs.