When will we go back to nuclear power for clean energy?

[Anonymous]

It seems power is getting more expensive. Wind farms do so much damage to the bird populations, solar does to plus it takes up so much land. The waste from solar is going to be a huge problem when the panels reach their end of life.

I hope we will get out of collective heads about how clean nuclear truly is.

This Ted talk really addresses the topic and I agree whole heartedly.

[Anonymous]

I agree, too.

[Anonymous]

Agreed. Nuclear energy would be a much better solution than the mess we have now.

[Anonymous]

Nuclear power has one huge unsolved problem - what to do with nuclear waste.

Any moron who pretends that nuclear power is "clean" is lying through their teeth.

Please educate yourself about nuclear waste before brainlessly repeating political talking points.

ALL power generation has disadvantages. Solar, wind and water energy all have issues. But none as potentially toxic and life-threatening as nuclear waste disposal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Nuclear power has one huge unsolved problem - what to do with nuclear waste.

Any moron who pretends that nuclear power is "clean" is lying through their teeth.

Please educate yourself about nuclear waste before brainlessly repeating political talking points.

ALL power generation has disadvantages. Solar, wind and water energy all have issues. But none as potentially toxic and life-threatening as nuclear waste disposal.

I am not parroting political talking points. Nuclear waste is being safely stored by the countries who use it. The pollution from coal is far more deadly and has killed far more than nuclear power ever has.

[Anonymous]

Nuclear can’t compete on cost— we subsidize them by virtually eliminating liability about the operator in the event of an accident and it’s still just way too expensive to build and operate.

It’s hard to take OP seriously when they are more worried about disposal of solar panels and the end of their life than disposal of nuclear waste.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Nuclear power has one huge unsolved problem - what to do with nuclear waste.

Any moron who pretends that nuclear power is "clean" is lying through their teeth.

Please educate yourself about nuclear waste before brainlessly repeating political talking points.

ALL power generation has disadvantages. Solar, wind and water energy all have issues. But none as potentially toxic and life-threatening as nuclear waste disposal.

People who say that solar and wind is clean are also lying through their teeth!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Nuclear power has one huge unsolved problem - what to do with nuclear waste.

Any moron who pretends that nuclear power is "clean" is lying through their teeth.

Please educate yourself about nuclear waste before brainlessly repeating political talking points.

ALL power generation has disadvantages. Solar, wind and water energy all have issues. But none as potentially toxic and life-threatening as nuclear waste disposal.

The plan was Yucca Mountain, and it still could be. The other option is re-"burning."

What makes you say it's "life-threatening"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nuclear can’t compete on cost— we subsidize them by virtually eliminating liability about the operator in the event of an accident and it’s still just way too expensive to build and operate.

It’s hard to take OP seriously when they are more worried about disposal of solar panels and the end of their life than disposal of nuclear waste.

What do you think is in solar panels? Heavy nasty metals like chromium and cadmium. The land that has to be cleared for effective power generation is massive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nuclear can’t compete on cost— we subsidize them by virtually eliminating liability about the operator in the event of an accident and it’s still just way too expensive to build and operate.

It’s hard to take OP seriously when they are more worried about disposal of solar panels and the end of their life than disposal of nuclear waste.

The problem with solar is not the disposal of the panels. It's that the sun goes down most afternoons, and then the solar panels produce nothing. When you accurately factor that into your costs, solar becomes much, much more expensive. And that's why solar only exists with heavy subsidies, in some form or other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Nuclear power has one huge unsolved problem - what to do with nuclear waste.

Any moron who pretends that nuclear power is "clean" is lying through their teeth.

Please educate yourself about nuclear waste before brainlessly repeating political talking points.

ALL power generation has disadvantages. Solar, wind and water energy all have issues. But none as potentially toxic and life-threatening as nuclear waste disposal.

The plan was Yucca Mountain, and it still could be. The other option is re-"burning."

What makes you say it's "life-threatening"?

+1. You can reburn nuclear waste several times for power and it takes the fission material out of it. Of course it isn't as easy as that statement makes it sound but it can be done and ultimately would be more efficient and cleaner. Much better, IMO, than drilling or fracking or piping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Nuclear power has one huge unsolved problem - what to do with nuclear waste.

Any moron who pretends that nuclear power is "clean" is lying through their teeth.

Please educate yourself about nuclear waste before brainlessly repeating political talking points.

ALL power generation has disadvantages. Solar, wind and water energy all have issues. But none as potentially toxic and life-threatening as nuclear waste disposal.

NP. I'm a nuclear engineer. Could you please help educate me on the issue of nuclear waste and why long term storage is so life threatening? I'm afraid that all I've learned has been nothing but political talking points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Nuclear power has one huge unsolved problem - what to do with nuclear waste.

Any moron who pretends that nuclear power is "clean" is lying through their teeth.

Please educate yourself about nuclear waste before brainlessly repeating political talking points.

ALL power generation has disadvantages. Solar, wind and water energy all have issues. But none as potentially toxic and life-threatening as nuclear waste disposal.

NP. I'm a nuclear engineer. Could you please help educate me on the issue of nuclear waste and why long term storage is so life threatening? I'm afraid that all I've learned has been nothing but political talking points.

NP.

I grew up next to a nuke plant. Do you understand how much nuclear waste there is and how ugly it is to store it? I don’t think you all do. Nuclear cheerleaders tend to gloss over the fact that while we can recycle nuclear waste, we don’t recycle nuclear waste and it’s gotta go somewhere and it’s not pretty. Safe (-ish) but ugly as hell and spent fuel rods seem to be like rabbits in terms of how fast they pop up.

Truly, for those of you who want to pretend that nuclear is some magical, down side free solution, volunteer your own backyard for beautiful dry cask storage. Some of our backyards are all full up and dumping it on the sacred lands of the Shoshone and the Paiute is not acceptable. https://sacredland.org/yucca-mountain-united-states/ If you want nuclear so bad, stop NIMBYing and step up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Nuclear power has one huge unsolved problem - what to do with nuclear waste.

Any moron who pretends that nuclear power is "clean" is lying through their teeth.

Please educate yourself about nuclear waste before brainlessly repeating political talking points.

ALL power generation has disadvantages. Solar, wind and water energy all have issues. But none as potentially toxic and life-threatening as nuclear waste disposal.

NP. I'm a nuclear engineer. Could you please help educate me on the issue of nuclear waste and why long term storage is so life threatening? I'm afraid that all I've learned has been nothing but political talking points.

NP.

I grew up next to a nuke plant. Do you understand how much nuclear waste there is and how ugly it is to store it? I don’t think you all do. Nuclear cheerleaders tend to gloss over the fact that while we can recycle nuclear waste, we don’t recycle nuclear waste and it’s gotta go somewhere and it’s not pretty. Safe (-ish) but ugly as hell and spent fuel rods seem to be like rabbits in terms of how fast they pop up.

Truly, for those of you who want to pretend that nuclear is some magical, down side free solution, volunteer your own backyard for beautiful dry cask storage. Some of our backyards are all full up and dumping it on the sacred lands of the Shoshone and the Paiute is not acceptable. https://sacredland.org/yucca-mountain-united-states/ If you want nuclear so bad, stop NIMBYing and step up.

Also - if you’re a nuclear engineer, playing dumb isn’t cute.

[Anonymous]

Never. The problem with nuclear is that it “only” provides clean energy. The greens want to force a restructuring of society to address other priorities and plentiful energy is an obstacle. Same reason the greens loved natural gas over coal until it turned out we had enough natural gas via fracking, which then had to be stopped.