Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

bluewin.ch

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

581–590 of 1001 posts

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#581

Post by mortoc »

Handrail wrote: post #558

I'm amazed that the main debate on how clean or dangerous nuclear energy is still circles around the plants themselves and storage of spent energy. I believe that glaring oversight here is that enriched nuclear fuel doesn't grow on trees. Somehow no one ever seems to talk about how efficient and clean the mining of these rare earths is and in which countries that happens. Nuclear being a clean energy is a myth as far…

Nuclear lifecycle calculations include mining. The human cost is terrible, but a separate problem (we could theoretically have ethical mining practices that don't produce more CO2).

Here's some numbers I was able to find on total carbon lifecycle for the energy types: https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5... - Coal is 68x more CO2 than Nuclear https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021-11/LCA_final.pdf - Coal is 165x more CO2 than Nuclear https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy - Coal is 161x more CO2 than Nuclear

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#582

Post by crote »

Danox wrote: post #455
tfourb wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China mostly builds nuclear reactors to retain the required industrial base to maintain a military nuclear program. Nuclear power is heavily subsidized in China, as it is everywhere in the world. It might be cheaper than in the US or Europe, but its not "cheap".

The Chinese have built a small thorium reactor for research and development, and they went on to build a much larger Thorium reactor which they have refueled on the fly without taking it out of service. I am still surprised that America hasn’t it treated it like a Sputnik moment, but we live in different times than the mid late 1950s. I think we’re waiting for the Chinese to ship it around the world like EV cars. Ima…

> Imagine a Thorium reactor that can be put into the bowels of a Hospital or an office building basement and supply electrical power.

Imagine the terrorism we'll see when highly radioactive material is within reach of any disgruntled office worker.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#583

Post by LtdJorge »

thelastgallon wrote: post #575

All countries should also invest in nuclear submarines, not just for security, but also as a source of power. Imagine having ports all around the country where a sub can plug in and provide power. Instead of building massive ports to ship stored energy (coal, oil, gas) from somewhere else in the world, its much easier to just have a plug in port and access nuclear energy. All countries have their own fleet, but can a…

Well, current nuclear subs are, roughly, in the order of 200MW thermal and 30MW electric. That's good for moving a submarine but pretty low for a city. There's already a wind turbine (DEC 26MW) capable of 36MW, which is crazy.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#584

Post by frollogaston »

dani__german wrote: post #573
frollogaston wrote: post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every time someone mentions a year where nuclear started being "safe," I find an incident after that year where radioactive or otherwise toxic materials were leaked into the surrounding environment, plus plenty of near misses. Broader than waste though. Maybe focus on how the likely alternatives are worse. The world isn't going to run completely on renewables, and coal puts surefire poison AND radioactive isotopes in…

If automotive was regulated like nuclear, then any car crash would result in all cars being sent to the scrap heap forever.

If nuclear were regulated like automotive, they'd let me run a reactor with minimal training at age 16, and the emissions inspector would be bribeable with $500. Well same with coal.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#585

Post by LtdJorge »

Handrail wrote: post #558

I'm amazed that the main debate on how clean or dangerous nuclear energy is still circles around the plants themselves and storage of spent energy. I believe that glaring oversight here is that enriched nuclear fuel doesn't grow on trees. Somehow no one ever seems to talk about how efficient and clean the mining of these rare earths is and in which countries that happens. Nuclear being a clean energy is a myth as far…

To add to what the other comment said, you have to take into account a reactor is normally refueled every 18-24 months. A coal plant, for example, takes in trains of coal a day.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#586

Post by nxy »

Handrail wrote: post #579
nxy wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Decades" is an extreme POV. Big tech companies are actively investing into nuclear power. Unlike those green renewables you described, nuclear runs almost nonstop. At least 90%+ of the time! Let's not forget about China, who can do it faster and cheaper compared to western standards. Obviously short term we'll be forced to use gas, renewables, etc. But saying nuclear will be irrelevant is wrong.. Reliable 24/7 clean…

It's not clean though? It requires massive amounts of mining and refining to even get the fuel, and it's no more renewable than fossiles

In general, “clean” as in zero carbon and air pollution

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#587

Post by LtdJorge »

lukan wrote: post #514
leonidasrup wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waste management has been solved problem. "A number of mercury, cyanide and arsenic waste repositories are operating worldwide including Canada (Giant Mine) and Germany (potash mines in Herfa-Neurode and Zielitz). Radioactive waste storage sites are under construction with the Onkalo in Finland being the most advanced." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_geological_repository "The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, or WIPP…

"For Europe I don't see a reason why each country needs a nuclear waste repository." Because apparently no country wants to be the dumpster for the radioactive waste of the others? I wonder why that is, when it is a solved problem.

Most plants don't need anything special for waste management. They just put it in dry cask storage and leave those in the outside.

Ironically, there's less background radiation around the casks than away from them, since they are so shielded you also get shielded from part of the background radiation too.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#588

Post by boguscoder »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #572
thelastgallon wrote: post #567

Two things to keep in mind when thinking about nuclear 1) Has the lowest deaths/TWH: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-p... 2) Any country that is not US absolutely needs to invest in nuclear technology. This is for your own security. In addition to providing energy security, it also provides physical security (with a bit more work). Without nuclear, your country will remain vulnerable to: 1)…

This. Any country without nuclear weapons is at the mercy of those that do. It's just strategic. Might as well get some clean energy out of it.

You made it sound like any country that wants nuclear weapons can get them.. just look at Iran. I think existing nuclear weapons club is very interested in keeping membership pretty tight

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#589

Post by moogly »

throw0101c wrote: post #559
moogly wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The technology is so unbelievably safe and efficient these days I think you mean unbelievably expensive and takes an eternity to build outside of China and Korea.

> I think you mean unbelievably expensive and takes an eternity to build outside of China and Korea. Japan was able to start construction on a new nuclear reactor and have its construction (and start commercial service) with-in five years, and did so every year from the mid-1980s to the early-2000s: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_commercial_nuclear_rea... The first unit you build will be expensive, the secon…

It's not 2004 anymore.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#590

Post by LtdJorge »

crote wrote: post #582
Danox wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Chinese have built a small thorium reactor for research and development, and they went on to build a much larger Thorium reactor which they have refueled on the fly without taking it out of service. I am still surprised that America hasn’t it treated it like a Sputnik moment, but we live in different times than the mid late 1950s. I think we’re waiting for the Chinese to ship it around the world like EV cars. Ima…

> Imagine a Thorium reactor that can be put into the bowels of a Hospital or an office building basement and supply electrical power. Imagine the terrorism we'll see when highly radioactive material is within reach of any disgruntled office worker.

You cannot make regular nuclear weapons out of thorium
Post reply on HN