I hate the nuclear hate. Maybe today we have better options, although micro-reactors have a lot of promise, but if we invested in nuclear energy 50 years ago our planet would not even be close to fucked up.
People are always fearful of the nuclear accidents but they don’t even come close to those killed in the extraction of fossil fuels, but poor lives don’t matter. God help anyone has to bear even a miniscule risk for their own energy production.
And the big roadblock is it takes way longer than an election cycle to get online, so there’s little to no incentives to start a project of one. Renewables have the advantage of going online within that window.
Looking it up to refresh my memory, it looks like there’s also the comparably very high construction cost and the cost of disposal and/or maintenance of the waste. Those feel like fairly fixed costs. Unless we can make those cheaper without sacrificing safety and worker pay, it seems like nuclear just isn’t economically practical.
People on average have a higher risk of exposure to radiation by going to their grandma’s for dinner than by living directly next to a nuclear power plant
I hate the nuclear hate. Maybe today we have better options, although micro-reactors have a lot of promise, but if we invested in nuclear energy 50 years ago our planet would not even be close to fucked up.
People are always fearful of the nuclear accidents but they don’t even come close to those killed in the extraction of fossil fuels, but poor lives don’t matter. God help anyone has to bear even a miniscule risk for their own energy production.
Thanks for listening to my rant
I thought the primary problem with nuclear is that it is incredibly expensive?
And the big roadblock is it takes way longer than an election cycle to get online, so there’s little to no incentives to start a project of one. Renewables have the advantage of going online within that window.
Private insurance for the project is incredibly expensive. But there are ways to go about it differently, if the will is there.
Looking it up to refresh my memory, it looks like there’s also the comparably very high construction cost and the cost of disposal and/or maintenance of the waste. Those feel like fairly fixed costs. Unless we can make those cheaper without sacrificing safety and worker pay, it seems like nuclear just isn’t economically practical.
People on average have a higher risk of exposure to radiation by going to their grandma’s for dinner than by living directly next to a nuclear power plant
Thank you for your rant. It is exasperating how people completely dismiss nuclear and politicians go right along with them.