Your views about Nuclear Power?

[cuafpr]

needs to be expanded, and researched for cold fusion. Its the best bet we have truly getting off coal/gas. solar/wind just wont cut it long term world wide for years to come.

[Paetolus]

Definitely something that needs more research, but I think it will be the answer to our energy problems once we're able to cut down on the lifetime of the waste that comes with fission. Once we do that, it just needs to be stored correctly for a few years, and it will be environmentally sound. Not to mention, fusion should look pretty promising in 40 years or so. Sadly, due to the fear-mongering that comes with research regarding nuclear power, it might take longer to be improved.

[Deathcries]

Generally in favor; newer reactor types like Canada's CANDU reactors are practically failproof.



All the high-level nuclear waste from every single plant for the last 40 years would just cover a football field to 8 meters depth. Even if we're talking about "build a deep bunker and bury it", that's totally achievable and functional, at the amounts we're talking about. The waste is far easier to deal with than emissions from fossil fuels, and very much in the "we can store it for 300 years until we figure out what to do with it" level of thinking.



Solar power is generally used to offset peak demands; power demand is highest in the daytime and early evening. Wind power is generally diversified across the grid; the wind is blowing somewhere.

Holy shit we actually agree on something.

ETA: Someone mentioned Fusion. If ever achievable in the long run I don't think it would be a good thing because it would be so cheap, and renewable that it would create too much heat and I think in the end may cause more problems than what coal causes. Remember green house gases prevent heat from leaving the earth's atmosphere.

- - - Updated - - -

Thorium reactors. Much less waste. For some costal regions i would think the ability to the desalination a lot of sea water would make them worth it. Otherwise natl gas or a combo of wind or solar will do the job fine.

I'd be good with Natural gas or Nuclear.

[lockblock]

We need to invent ZPM's already.

[trabajador5k]

The fact that we aren't 100% equipped with renewable energy sources is asinine at best and corrupt politics at worst. Yet there is still the matter of storing the energy. Batteries tend to produce a lot of heat e.g. a battery inside a home would dissipate heat and waste more energy in air conditioning to cool the house (law of conservation of energy). Green energy is also not available on demand unless we can store it securely and efficiently, unlike non-renewable variants where the energy can be controlled and monitored in real time.

The problem with nuclear power as stated in previous posts is not so much the safety of the reactor itself but how do we dispose of the waste? 30 years is a long time for something so toxic to be sitting around, if we had to mostly rely on nuclear energy I'm sure we could build up quite a stockpile of it. Nuclear fuel is very cheap.

[Stormspark]

Nuclear reactors actually don't put out that much waste. The only waste for the most part is spent fuel rods. The huge underground tanks of radioactive waste in places like Hanford are NOT from nuclear power. That nasty stuff is from making plutonium for bombs, not from nuclear power.

Chernobyl is not the norm for nuclear power. Nuclear power is FAR safer and puts out FAR less pollution than coal. It actually puts out less radiation than coal too, even counting the accidents. Chernobyl was a bad design, but even with the bad design the accident could not have happened if it didn't have inexperienced people literally playing with the reactor with all of the safety systems turned off.

We need to invent ZPM's already.

No kidding, that'd be awesome. Just dig around in Antarctica.

[sonololo]

To be honest its still the only true renewable and convenient energy source.

Just to be fair, when comparing damage from uranium reactor and, say, coal generation, coal escapes far to the first place; nuclear accidents are one-time, but the coal pollution accumulates over time, and is radioactive too.

It's sad to see that Germany goes to bring its coal plants back online. Hope people will wisen up.

The main problem is still the waste and the inherent flaws in RBMK type reactors. Molten salt reactors don't have that flaw, because active mass acts as a coolant, so any coolant loss just turns the reactor off.

Maybe if someone decides that the thorium reactors are way to go and finances them...

[Azelas]

Nuclear Power is the most realistic way to have an incredible amount of power at a very good environmental "cost". Solar and Wind are nice, yes. But they're ridiculously inneficient compared to nuclear at the moment.

[Doctor Amadeus]

It’s a stupid idea for power and energy use those that disagree can have one built next to them. We have viable alternatives.

[kenoathcarn]

Until the sun doesn't shine or the wind doesn't blow.

Here in Australia we have an abundance of uranium and vast deserts, hundreds miles from anyone and have no history of earthquakes that are perfect for nuclear power plants. Yet we have none because politicians are idiots.

The whole "Sun doesn't shine and wind doesn't blow" thing isn't a very big issue anymore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLV_dSPYTsI

AEMO presentation about the energy network going forward.

Also it would be political suicide for any politician here in Australia to even mention the N word. its not because politicians are idiots, its because the public opinion of Nuclear is similar to that of Terrorism. and wrong as it may be you're probably never going to convince them otherwise.

[Firatha]

It’s a stupid idea for power and energy use those that disagree can have one built next to them. We have viable alternatives.

You clearly have zero knowledge about the subject other then that you think you know its bad judging by your post its may not be 100% perfect aka waste that you can just bury in a suitable geologically sound area sure but its far from stupid .

[schwarzkopf]

Nuclear Power is an awesome SHORT TERM solution to a CURRENT problem.

Problem is - the SHORT TERM solution needed to be implemented 15-20 years ago.

[Torto]

The whole "Sun doesn't shine and wind doesn't blow" thing isn't a very big issue anymore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLV_dSPYTsI

AEMO presentation about the energy network going forward.

Also it would be political suicide for any politician here in Australia to even mention the N word. its not because politicians are idiots, its because the public opinion of Nuclear is similar to that of Terrorism. and wrong as it may be you're probably never going to convince them otherwise.

I think we are happy enough with nuclear power it's just no one wants a plant anywhere near them, which is probably fair enough. But if they built one in a remote area like the north of South Australia where the population is effectively zero then no one would care. The upside would be tremendous tho with reliable cheap power.

[kenoathcarn]

I think we are happy enough with nuclear power it's just no one wants a plant anywhere near them, which is probably fair enough. But if they built one in a remote area like the north of South Australia where the population is effectively zero then no one would care. The upside would be tremendous tho with reliable cheap power.

it's not just the NIMBY'ism, Every poll I've seen on the subject shows that the general public has massive concerns over safety, and things like fukushima only serve to solidify this position.

If you were to ask most people in the general public they would never consider that coal kills far more people directly and indirectly then nuclear ever has or will likely ever come close to, It honestly wouldn't surprise me if it was less then accidents from rooftop solar installations.

I stand by my statement that pushing Nuclear power as a policy here in Australia would be political suicide.

[Tackhisis]

The fact that we aren't 100% equipped with renewable energy sources is asinine at best and corrupt politics at worst.

It is due to the fact that there is no possibility to harvest and store it. Solar batteries are very expensive and inefficient, they require complex equipment to produce the usable electricity, wind turbines are also inefficient, and Sun and wind are very unreliable. Coal and nuclear plants are stable, reliant and predictable, and can generate electricity directly with minimal losses.
Renewable energy sources are beyond our reach at our current technological level.

- - - Updated - - -

I stand by my statement that pushing Nuclear power as a policy here in Australia would be political suicide.

A few more years of regular blackouts, and the "green" will become a swearword there.

[XDurionX]

It's not the accidents that make nuclear power unusable. It's the waste storage and the prospect to have to pay for it for decades and centuries. We have no solution to store it for a few years, let alone centuries. It has become uneconomic the moment we decided it's better not to dump the waste into the ocean.

Fusion might be a different beast, but fission is an outdated technology.

[Deleted]

It's clean energy, as long as you keep investing in keeping everything safe and modernised. The junk that we have to dump is the main problem.

With Tesla's cheap rocket it's perhaps interesting to simply shoot the nuclear junk into space / into the sun, making Nuclear power plants a worthwhile option again.

[caervek]

My opinion: A great source of power and currently the only viable replacement for fossil fuels. We should be focusing on using it until solar/wind improve instead of trying to focus on them before they are ready.

The sad fact though is that nuclear will never get away from the reputation created by accidents like Chernobyl/Fukushima, despite those accidents being impossible at a modern power station (they were 50+ year old designs) many people believe that we use the same type of technology today as it's all referred to as "nuclear". Which is a bit comical really as it's exactly the same as saying Teslas are bad for the environment and using a 60's Mustang as the argument because both are "cars".

- - - Updated - - -

The junk that we have to dump is the main problem.

Modern plants can actually consume the waste created by older plants as fuel.

[Deleted]

Modern plants can actually consume the waste created by older plants as fuel.

Ok, that's quite nice then

But I still like the idea of shooting stuff into the sun.

[Deleted]

As long as it isn't anywhere close to where I live, sure. I'd rather have water/solar/wind power.

I'm alright jack. Good attitude to have. I don't mind using the cheap electricity but some other poor smucks can live next to it.

Nice attitude.