31–40 of 83 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Think about it terms of throwing bananas into the water
They make a splash? So many more apropos sayings instead like "tears in the rain" or "drops in the ocean"
Here's why the parent chose bananas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_equivalent_dose
I really can't square this idea that "global warming will end civilization" if we don't reduce CO2 with not using nuclear power. (Even worse, shutting down existing, working plants.)
It can be summed up into two key questions: is it necessary, and is it effective? One could argue it is necessary but it is undeniable that it is not effective -- nuclear power plants take decades to bring online and then they may never see break-even. Not only that but they require vast sums of water for the entire lifetime of the nuclear plant (which is fast becoming a scarcity, if not because of increased consumpt…
This plant is already online. That’s what makes the debate interesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They make a splash? So many more apropos sayings instead like "tears in the rain" or "drops in the ocean"
> So many more apropos sayings instead… Here's why the parent chose bananas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_equivalent_dose
I really can't square this idea that "global warming will end civilization" if we don't reduce CO2 with not using nuclear power. (Even worse, shutting down existing, working plants.)
It doesn't square, it's extraordinarily irrational. With a trillion dollars the US could build 40-60 new domestic nuclear power plants (we have 54 currently). We can afford it (witness stimulus programs, or the Ukraine v Russia war). What we can't afford is to not do it and to watch our nuclear power base vanish. And we should be going further than that. We should be leveraging the global reserve currency and trade a…
The ship has sailed on the current generation of nuclear power.
“Clean” energy. Gas fired plants are clean: they only produce CO2 and H20. Nuclear is “dirty”: they produce no CO2, but relatively small amounts of highly toxic waste. Bonus for “clean” “biomass” plants that actually produce hazard gases from burning tires!
> Gas fired plants are clean: they only produce CO2 and H20. AFAIK, that can only be the case if you combust the gas with pure oxygen; air also has a lot of nitrogen, so combusting with air will always lead to some oxides of nitrogen appearing in the output. > Nuclear is “dirty”: they produce no CO2, but relatively small amounts of highly toxic waste. It depends on your point of view. That highly toxic waste is compl…
question, why aren't we building more nuclear power plant like china? isn't gen 4 reactor safer?
Because even in china they can't build nuclear as quickly (and likely as cheaply) as wind and solar. It's hugely different [0][1]. Over the last 10 years, they used 3.5x more energy (so not nameplate capacity, but actually generated energy) from solar and wind than they did from nuclear. Further, if you download the data [1] an look at the derivative you get an even more grim picture. Not only is wind and solar incre…
-ancient proverb
question, why aren't we building more nuclear power plant like china? isn't gen 4 reactor safer?
Once there was a remote mountaintop monastery, nestled high in the clouds above a deep gorge. To reach the monastery, visitors were required to ride in a basket pulled up from the top. One day, halfway up the cliff, a tourist frowned at the condition of the rope. He asked his guide, "How often do they replace this rope, anyway?" The monk answered "Why, as soon as the old one breaks, of course."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I know you are being ironic with "clear", but gas fired plants should also be "billed" for the dirt created by mining the natural gas in the first place. +1 to taxing externalities. I would also add a tax to the plants that ever used Russian gas with proceeds going to restoration of Ukraine. If not for the decision of German public to shut down their nuclear reactors, Putin would have never had that much money to s…
> If not for the decision of German public to shut down their nuclear reactors, Putin would have never had that much money to start the war. 55% of natural gas that circulated in Germany in 2021 came from russia. 48% of natural gas that circulated in Germany in 2021 was exported to other countries. ~13% of natural gas in Germany that year was used for electricity production. But go on and tell us how keeping nuclear…
I really can't square this idea that "global warming will end civilization" if we don't reduce CO2 with not using nuclear power. (Even worse, shutting down existing, working plants.)
Climate collapse will cripple us, but the system is self correcting. The next civilisation will do it better
In the time scales of pollution that nuclear power entails there is room for many such cycles
I really cannot square the greed of "consume now" and "pay for a thousand generations" with any moral framework
We should pay the price ourselves for what we have done to the climate and leave room for the future
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can be summed up into two key questions: is it necessary, and is it effective? One could argue it is necessary but it is undeniable that it is not effective -- nuclear power plants take decades to bring online and then they may never see break-even. Not only that but they require vast sums of water for the entire lifetime of the nuclear plant (which is fast becoming a scarcity, if not because of increased consumpt…
> nuclear power plants take decades to bring online This plant is already online. That’s what makes the debate interesting.
Better get started