Dozens of American nuclear plants sited below dams are at a much greater risk of becoming even worse Fukushimas.
What a fucking surprise that is. In an official report they redacted information revealing the true danger from flooding at dozens of nuke plants. They claimed “security reasons” yet the Department of Homeland Security reviewed the report and found nothing needing to be redacted.
Can we finally admit nuclear energy is a mature industry that has had 7 decades to deliver on its promise of limitless too-cheap-to-even-meter energy and it just gets more expensive?
No. It’s an industry crippled by politics; and quite technologically backwards in America. And “too cheap to meter” was what is known as wild eyed futurism; if you judge an industry by that standard, of course it’s going to come across as a failure. We don’t have helicopters in every garage or laser pistols either. Guess helicopters and lasers are useless then.
One thing to keep in mind is that nuclear reactors were never solely for power. Of the three possible basic designs I am aware of, enriched uranium, thorium (much more plentiful), and traveling wave (much more efficient use of uranium, producing much less nuclear waste), they chose the one that manufactures loads of plutonium. And guess what that is useful for.
I don’t think anyone seriously believes that nuclear power will ever be the super-cheap limitless stuff that they thought it would be in the 1950s. However, if you need a lot of power, in most places you generally have two choices. You can have a nuke plant or a coal plant. Do you want nuclear waste and all of the problems that go along with nuke plants, or do you want global warming? For all practical purposes, there aren’t any other choices. “Green” energy sources like wind and solar just don’t put out enough energy.
Don’t bitch about nuke plants unless you have something better to suggest as an alternative.
For coal, don’t foget mercury and sulfate emissions, and problems with coal ash disposal. Oh yeah, and coal mining. (Yeah, uranium mining does damage too, but we don’t mine anywhere near as much of it.)
You know, there’s nothing stopping you from owning a helicopter except it would take a little effort on your part. You have only yourself to blame for not having a helicopter. You probably already have a laser device of some sort in your home.
What you can’t have, is that huge flying helicarrier SHIELD uses in the Avengers movie, because you’re asking for something helicopter technology can’t reasonably provide. So it is with nuclear energy. There’s nothing wrong with nuclear medicine or nuclear submarines or nuclear powered Mars rovers.
you might want to actually study the subject, also you might want to consider that the Plant that failed in Japan did so under what can only be extreme conditions and was a very old plant as well.
given the knowledge we have now if we were to build a plant with the intention of Not producing massive amounts of waste and instead focused solely on power production and efficient use of fuel we could easily build a very very safe plant (or hundreds of the things). of course this is America where science is a religion and the earth is 6k years old and at least one of the religitards has somehow ended up on the national science committee. (yes I used the term “religitards” no I don’t particularly care if you find it offensive, if you are so blinded by your religious beliefs that you are in fact functionally retarded you deserve the label)
I haven’t noticed that the religitards were targeting nuclear power. The nuclear industry has always had a shadow over it due to failures to deliver. Now they cross their hearts and hope to die and promise there won’t be any problems with the new ones. Yes Lucy, I’m sure you won’t pull that football away this time.
Last time I looked there were something like 31 countries with nuclear power. I assume 30 of those aren’t the US. Where is this magical power plant you’re talking about?
Also, religitards are pro-nuke. Makes sense, since they’re comfortable being told what to believe and already rely on faith in magic to save them.
There is better technology today. But nuclear power plants are still dependent on human beings to build, supply, operate, maintain, and secure them. We don’t have better humans, perhaps they are even worse.
Maybe if we could build new nuclear plants today they wouldn’t be at risk of being flooded. It isn’t like the “nuclear industry” has had the freedom to up and relocate those facilities at a whim, and for the last 70 years they’ve decided not to.
Of course I’ve looked up these things. Why do you think I asked where these modern nuclear power plants are?
These designs you’re talking about aren’t new either. They were all thought up way back when the first nuclear reactors were thought up. So was fusion. These things can’t be done economically. If they could, they would.
Quick question for ya, which has a highest death per terawatt rate. Wind, Hydro, Solar or Nuclear. Which has the lowest?
Bet ya don’t have a clue.
Just admit that the word nuclear scares you and that is the underlying reason for your beliefs. 'Cause it certainly ain’t the safety record of any particular energy source.
Off the top of my head dams of all things have killed the most people in the most dramatic and directly measurable fashion.
In the indirect but statistically still likely and measurable fashion there is coal. Even barring global warming coal is still probably king in that department.
Not sure where oil/natural gas fits into this list of death per kilowatt hour department.
Running a distant third is probably nuclear. And half its problem is idiots that keep it from being safer and cheaper due to shear stupidity from public pressure from the morons that wouldnt know science if it knocked on their door.