Why do Many Environmentalists Hate Nuclear Power?

[MerinPally]

Oh right - the typical human way of thinking. If it's out of sight it's out of mind and no longer an issue. /rollseyes Just because you spend a shitload of money to bury something and it's still "buried" whether it's under some dirt or in a concrete vault, doesn't mean it's not a problem. It's still poison that will remain for thousands of years. What happens when a massive earthquake comes along and destroys your fancy burial tomb? Pretty sure a lot of these burial sites have been leaking as well. Only human ignorance would create a dangerous, poisonous substance and then come up with the solution of digging a hold in a mountain or earth to "get rid" of it.

Btw - the Coriolis Effect isn't the cause of wind. The effect simply impacts the way the weather patterns move.

My god you think you're so aloof from everyone else it hurts even my neck to try and look up and I know I'm guilty of doing that myself. You know they've thought about the earthquake and leakage part right? It's called "putting it under a huge quantity of water" - go google "Sellafield Storage Pond". The way to get around Earthquakes? Go put them in a non-earthquake zone. Threat of terrorism? That's sorted too. I want some evidence of leakage please, the burden of proof is on you seeing as you're making the claim.

The bolded part is so stupid it's untrue. You know that many animals take a shit and then bury it? And a LOT of animals go out of their way to not shit where they live because they'll get ill. Just because humans have moved on from "not shitting in the food" to "nuclear waste" doesn't mean that exactly the same message isn't exhibited elsewhere.

[Laize]

Oh right - the typical human way of thinking. If it's out of sight it's out of mind and no longer an issue. /rollseyes Just because you spend a shitload of money to bury something and it's still "buried" whether it's under some dirt or in a concrete vault, doesn't mean it's not a problem. It's still poison that will remain for thousands of years. What happens when a massive earthquake comes along and destroys your fancy burial tomb? Pretty sure a lot of these burial sites have been leaking as well. Only human ignorance would create a dangerous, poisonous substance and then come up with the solution of digging a hold in a mountain or earth to "get rid" of it.

Btw - the Coriolis Effect isn't the cause of wind. The effect simply impacts the way the weather patterns move.

A) Coriolis effect isn't the sole cause of the wind, but one of them.

B) That's why they hire geologists and seismologists to determine the worst case scenario for a given area. That's why these "burial tombs" are in the middle of geologically dead areas (Like Yucca Mountain) that have been that way for 13 million years and will continue to be that way for the next 10,000. Even a 10,000 year fuel cycle is a blink of an eye to a geologist.

[Deleted]

So much creationism pseudo-science in this thread it's making my head hurt.

This is what it looks like in Bełchatów, Poland:




(Click on the pictures to enlarge.)

There's a summit going on, Poland is the host country. They're refusing to let go of that source of pollution, though. The reporters of YLE, the main Finnish news channel were shooed away from taking those pictures. That's what people who are driving down nuclear in favor of coal don't want you to see. They just want to beat the drums of how nuclear is so bad.

95% of the power in Poland comes from coal. Sure, coal plants could be cleaner than this lethal polluter; for example Hanasaari in Finland is three times cleaner than Bełchatów when it comes to CO2, six times cleaner when it comes to SO2.

Anyways... Those deadly clouds are an immediate threat, which will affect your children and grandchildren. Some nuclear repository going bad in two thousand years should be pretty fucking meaningless in comparison.

[Zarc]

I'm an environmentalist and I support Nuclear Power. Unfortunately the "Environmental Party" in my country does not have the best policies for minimizing our impact on the climate, but many assume they do just because they hijacked the "Environmental Party" name.

[Spikeydeath]

Thorium energy is the best Nuclear energy with barely any waste.
Heck even with uranium my uncle said the best bet was to either lob it at the sun or Jupiter.

[Laize]

Thorium energy is the best Nuclear energy with barely any waste.
Heck even with uranium my uncle said the best bet was to either lob it at the sun or Jupiter.

You realize the Thorium process involves transmuting it into ²³³U first, right? Its waste materials have shorter half lives than ²³⁵U but which are still measured from hundreds to 1000 years.

Best option is shoving that stuff under Yucca Mountain.

[Masark]

Thorium energy is the best Nuclear energy with barely any waste.
Heck even with uranium my uncle said the best bet was to either lob it at the sun or Jupiter.

1. Thorium fission produces just as much waste as uranium fission. It's just more convenient waste, as it's a mix of only short lived fission products (which only need relatively brief storage) or very long lived fission products (which are too weakly radioactive to require elaborate storage).

2. Except for the little problem of getting it there.

[Deleted]

Best option is shoving that stuff under Yucca Mountain.

Take a look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_...uel_repository

That's what us Finns are doing. I guess Yucca mountain would be along the same lines.

[Masark]

Take a look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_...uel_repository

That's what us Finns are doing. Surely the Americans are capable of doing the same?

Umm, how did you end up with that nested quote? The "little problem of getting it there" was in reply to Spikeydeath suggesting "shoot it into the sun/Jupiter"

[Neliah]

In 9000 years I'm sure we will have better ways of disposing nuclear waste, as well have better ways of producing energy.

Ha ha.. I highly doubt that humans will exist in 9000 years at the destructive speed we're at. Rainforests, oceans ect are either being cut down to make more space for human consumption (agriculture) or we're poluting the oceans and overfishing to the brink of extinction of several species.. So 9000 years? No way.

[Payday]

Umm, how did you end up with that nested quote? The "little problem of getting it there" was in reply to Spikeydeath suggesting "shoot it into the sun/Jupiter"

I wonder what the cost analysis is for shooting it into Jupiter vs. babysitting it for 10s of thousands of years.

[Sevyvia]

"Why do Many Environmentalists Hate Nuclear Power?"

Because environmentalists as a group are all about hype and going with whatever some dude says, and not so much about facts.

[Masark]

I wonder what the cost analysis is for shooting it into Jupiter vs. babysitting it for 10s of thousands of years.

Assuming we used Falcon heavy rockets, we'd be looking at about 20,000 launches at a cost on the order of 3 trillion dollars

And probably at least 10% of it will wind up randomly scattered somewhere on Earth due to rocket failures.

[Kalyyn]

My thoughts? They can come up with all of the ass-backward justification for hating nuclear power that they want, but almost all of their arguments only apply to countries outside of America. Chernobyl? Inferior Russian design. Fukishima? Inferior Japanese design. Comparing any such events to an American nuclear power plant is like saying a battle ship won't float because that raft you make out of pool noodles fell apart.

Ultimately it's because nuclear power represents man's dominion over all of creation. It is the idea that we took one of nature's most powerful forces and said "we can do that better." And these hippies absolutely hate that.

[Rukentuts]

Chernobyl? Inferior Russian design. Fukishima? Inferior Japanese design.

Three Mile Island? Luck.

[Laize]

Take a look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_...uel_repository

That's what us Finns are doing. Surely the Americans are capable of doing the same?

We have a facility under Yucca Mountain.

Our environmentalists had it shut down because they don't understand how geology works.

[Kalyyn]

Three Mile Island? Luck.

Luck? I'd attribute it more to the fact that unlike Russia, America actually cares about the lives and well being of its people, and prepares for such events.

And unless you can find any civilian deaths in the States caused by a nuclear meltdown, I don't think you've got a stance to challenge that.

[Masark]

Fukishima? Inferior Japanese design

Might want to double check who designed those reactors.

[Deleted]

Umm, how did you end up with that nested quote? The "little problem of getting it there" was in reply to Spikeydeath suggesting "shoot it into the sun/Jupiter"

Sorry, I'm crosseyed. Laize said, just above your post, that the best option is the Yucca mountain. Somehow I saw you replying to him. Oh well, shit happens. I'll fix my post.

We have a facility under Yucca Mountain.

Our environmentalists had it shut down because they don't understand how geology works.

Yeah I saw you mentioning that, hence my small quote lapse earlier. Well, easy for us Finns, we have no geology. Read: geological activity. I think the highest we get here is like 3-4 on the Richter scale once in a blue moon, and nobody really feels it.

[Laize]

Might want to double check who designed those reactors.

It wasn't the reactors that caused the Fukushima incident.

It was determined to be insufficient seawall engineering.