ITT: Nuclear power discussion.
Your fear is the only thing stopping us from pumping out gigawatt hour upon gigawatt hour of the cleanest, safest, and most reliable electricity the world has ever seen.
>>703951378
Actually we need cold fusion for that.
>>703951378
Nuclear power is the only energy source worth investing in. This solar bullshit is a pipedream
>>703951981
Well that's a fantasy, so don't hold your breath.
>>703951378
It is a well justified fear. Take a look around these boards and it is easy to see that people posses evil in them as well as good. There is someone out there that would use nuclear material for the worst. And nuclear contains such immense power all it takes is one evil act to ruin a lot of things. Nuclear power is just too dangerous given how human nature is.
>>703952035
exactly, solar and wind take up way too much area for the power they make. How can people justify destroying thousands of acres for "clean" energy?
Not to mention how fucking inefficient solar is.
>>703951378
why not use thorium instead of uranium
cheaper, cleaner, safer
>>703951378
Until they achieve fusion, nuclear can fuck off
>>703952314
thorium is impossible to extract energy from retard
>>703951378
how do you mitigate against things like earthquakes and tsunamis?
>>703952453
how fucking stupid are you
where did you hear that
Fukushima you fucking moron.
Plus, there aren't enough transuranics on the planet to power the world for a century, even with secondary burns and even if we could extract the majority of the U235 we know about... which is in the oceans.
>>703952232
>what is MAD
>>703952453
autism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49WV3DH_tHs
>>703952474
you don't build them on a fault line, like the derpanese
>>703952474
Best starting place would be away from japan and California
>>703952596
He doesn't know but I'll answer for him. Mutually Assured Destruction. It totally nullifies that retards logic
>>703952591
ur stupid for thinking thorium is better than uranium gayboy
>>703951378
Sounds legit.
Health Physicist here. Most ppl still have no fucking clue about Fukushima, its causes, or its impacts, but FUCK there are a lot of ignorant bastards with strong opinions about it.
>>703951378
>Safest
Jesus people come on.
>>703952232
Energy-production grade fuel is not the same as weapons grade fuel. Fuel produced for energy is ~3% and weapons grade is >10% I believe. Thus cannot be used for development of nuclear weapons. Plus the plants are guarded by PMC's anyway.
>goddamn neo-liberal fag
OP's asshole could be used for converting friction into raw energy.
>>703952826
wanna explain why or are you just gonna call anyone that doesn't agree with you gayboy
>>703952933
>health physicist
Oncologist here. Nuclear energy is what will help us get off this rock
>>703951378
>>703951378
Thorium reactors are much safer, cheaper, and don't produce tons of waste
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium-based_nuclear_power
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2015/01/16/thorium-future-nuclear-energy/#.V9oByTXkqTI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY
Absolute honesty, trustworthiness, and reliability in nuclear power plant trainining, operations, and maintenance.
>>703952596
I am a newfag your idiot. Post like a civilized human being and I might understand what you are trying to say faggot.
>>703952246
Then there's the problem with how expensive renewables are right now
>>703952474
The US has 15 reactors on the most active fault line in the contiguous United States. If an earthquake reaches a 7.7 there, then three cities would pretty much be gone, 300 million dollars of expenses, and millions of people displaced. Also, one of those cities has 9 Fortune 500 companies and a Federal Reserve Bank: St. Louis. We have built nuclear power plants that can withstand earthquakes
>>703952232
These fears are unfounded to date. To build a reactor, obtain the correct fuel at the proper enrichment, then re-purpose those isotopes for use in a bomb...it takes more than one evil person to exact such a plan. That would be a government sized effort, and no country is going to enact such a plan successfully without every other country knowing about it.
>>703952414
Why do you say that?
>>703952453
Wrong. Retard.
>>703952474
The same way we do for any other larrge building in regions threatened by natural disasters. We take proper precautions in the location, the build quality, and we put safety measures in place. We do our best to mitigate risks, and to date we've done well as a species.
We've had clean coal for years, if any emissions come out then bells and alarms go off. Obama shutting down coal plants yet giving General Electric ones waivers to continue operation. Fucking fascism.
>>703952474
Independent backup systems stored above ground in hardened seismically insulated facilities on site. That's what they've implemented since then.
Also, the improvements were 6 months from completion at Fukushima. Sites closer to the epicenter were fine because they had redundant independent power sources above grade.
>>703953258
What about salt reactors?
My understanding is that those kinds of accidents would be impossible?
>>703951378
I think more than fear its a lack of understanding of how nuclear power stations work because in general when people hear nuclear they think bomb despite the fact they function and utilize nuclear material in completely different ways
>>703953541
have you seen china and there air quality?
coal isn't a very good choice
If the scientist/engineer fags could figure out thorium fission we wouldn't have to worry about energy for about 2000 years.
>>703951378
>Your fear is the only thing stopping us from pumping out gigawatt hour upon gigawatt hour of the cleanest, safest, and most reliable electricity the world has ever seen.
That kind of thinking should get you exiled.
>>703951378
It's neither the cleanest, the safest nor the most reliable, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't use it. If you weigh the potential harm against the benefits, any reasonable person should be pro-nuclear. And by reasonable person, I mean someone who believes in global warming, isn't paranoid and is capable of understanding the difference between nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons.
>>703953062
Weapons grade is >90%, and requires far more advanced and intensive enrichment methods. There are some research and military reactors that run 90% fuel, but most power reactors are 3-5%, with some as high as 20%. 20% is about as high as you can get without advanced enrichment methods.
>>703952592
What about fukushima? It happened. It sucked. We're cleaning it up. No one died from exposure.
And...uh...yes, there absolutely are. We have metric fucktons of uranium as do other countries, and even more thorium
>>703952989
Don't be naive. Look at some numbers. Compare the deaths per kwhr. Compare total deaths. Compare rates of pollution. I'll give you a hint. Nuclear wins every comparison.
One more point to make:
Who has the best record of using Nuclear Power? The United States Navy.
Their reactors are built by General Electric's Electric Boat Division
Contract GE to build the reactors, float the reactor in a sizable man-made lake, get navy veterans to run them.
Problem solved
>>703953212
Thorium reactors are nuclear reactors dipshit.
>>703953599
Yeah, from what I've read, they are pretty stable. Granted, only in the past couple of months I've been really interested in nuclear power. I'd ask a chemist or nuclear physicist if you want to know more.
>>703951378
thorium powered plants would be alot better nigga
>>703953990
Desperately building an underground ice wall to prevent tainted ground water from going into the ocean doesn't seem like a successful cleanup to me.
>>703953215
Okay powerschool fag.
>>703952453
I don't think you know the definition of energy.
>>703951378
No love for wind power?
>wind turbine explodes
Oh well, send 10 guys out with a crane next week to build 3 more.
>nuclear power plant explodes
HOLY FUCKBALLS!!! Massive amounts of land are now uninhabitable for decades and useless for farming for centuries! Send in the military to clean it! Each person can only work for 3 minutes at a time and they'll all get radiation burns anyway! Better warn other countries a 1000 miles away so that they can kill off all of their animals and dye them blue!!
>nuclear energy
>cleanest
Pick one.
>inb4 they're well managed, safety shit, blah blah
It has happened before. It will happen again.
>>703951378
It's only cheap when the government pays for it.
>>703953541
Coal not renewable. And we have cleanER coal. It's not emissions free and nuclear still beats it.
>>703953549
This is basically correct.
Source: I work in the nuclear power industry
>>703953599
In theory, they take care of all manner of issues. The tech was abandoned in the 60s because of a lot of metallurgical and engineering issues, but we've advanced technologically to the point where it's worth revisiting.
>>703953990
how long can you keep building tanks to hold the radioactive water?
>>703953241
>Wants manners and respect.
backthewayyoucame.jpg
>>703954160
Denonstrating moral courage to accept responsibility for one's actions.
>>703954373
Besides, thanks to fraking natural gas is a lot cheaper. And that shit is cleaner anyway.
>>703954105
But they are NOT as risky or dangerous as a Uranium reactor, as safe as those are in actuality.
Thorium is just better in nearly every way, and the output material is useless as a weapon.
>>703954476
Every ten years till the world goes bankrupt or dies?
>>703951378
>OP in charge of knowing why nuclear isn't built
It's the cost, retard. That's why they're only currently being built by integrated utilities with guaranteed rate of return policies in southern states.
I guess I'll give my two cents. I'm no specialist, but I have taken a tour of our local power plant a few times as a kid. I belive it to be the cleanest most efficient means of power. The waste is pretty nomonal, they're not really That dangerous. We've had like three meltdowns in human history. I think as long as we're responsible as the human race it will be what substains us until a better source arrises.
>>703953704
Well yes, it all ties together. If the nuclear power industry were better at disseminating information and educating the public, then there would be much less fear and blind opposition. Knowledge pulls back the veil of fear.
>>703953713
It is figured out for the most part. If we could get more funding for research and development and cut back on some of the bullshit red tape in pplace, we could have a thoruim reactor running in 10 years i'm sure.
>>703953713
MITs working on bringing up a new fusion reactor design which should easily break the power budget issue; I.e., it produces more power than it uses.
>>703953901
>>703953911
It absolutely is all of those things. But as long as you're pro nuke I'm happy
>>703954619
http://nautil.us/blog/no-one-knows-what-to-do-with-fukushimas-endless-tanks-of-radioactive-water
TEPCO has been filling fields with vast arrays of storage tanks to cope with the accumulating water. The company’s 40-year plan for decommissioning the plant calls for the construction of an underground “ice wall” to freeze the soil around the reactor buildings and divert rainwater, and for plugging the leaks in the buildings. But TEPCO has run into problems with the ice wall—the underground tunnels carrying coolant haven’t gotten cold enough to sufficiently freeze the surrounding ground—and the more long-term solution of plugging the reactor buildings’ leaks is still a distant goal. In the meantime, TEPCO keeps building tanks.
>>703954323
There is a HUGE windfarm just north of West Lafayette IN. Probably hundreds of them standing in fields of corn and soy beans.
And the wind almost always blows there. Flat for miles and miles. The only problem is they can't build anything else there because those big turbines have huge exclusion zones around them.
Build as many of them as you want, but there will always be days when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow. So you gotta have something else on standby
>>703954102
Or just get us to run the land based reactors. No more boats or water please.
>>703953911
>And by reasonable person, I mean someone who believes in global warming, isn't paranoid and is capable of understanding the difference between nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons.
So pretty much no one then.
>>703954323
Wind power
>Fucking expensive as shit
>certain climate
>takes up space
>barely powerful
Nuclear Energy
>inexpensive
>over 50 years of use, only 8 people have died: 3 of those were from actual production
>3 mile island had no deaths
>efficient
>nuclear power plants don't explode, it's not a fucking atomic bomb
>>703954692
Also correct. With an administration more willing to support nuclear, the base rates would be guaranteed for the utilities, much like how wind and solar are being subsidized.
Moreover, the cheap cost of (high-greenhouse) natural gas is a huge distraction from building nuclear, which is (rightly, to a point) regulated so much that it is no longer affordable.
>>703951378
OP what do you think about:
1. rogue countries getting leaked material plans.
2. countries being asked to pay unfair subsidies for new plants (aka hinkley point c).
3. The monopoly of westinghouse and Areva.
4. The poor quality of uranium mining in poor countries.
5. small reactors that save space such as SMR and floating power plants on submarines.
6. what is your nationality?
>>703955118
Well if you are gonna run a fission reactor, having it out on a lake adds a safety factor. Lakes are all but earthquake proof, and if the reactor goes bad you can scuttle it.
Nobody realizes solar energy could be harnessed using solar roadways. CLEAN, EFFECIENT, and no clear cutting to create them. They'll also pay for themselves in time, just a large initial cost.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qlTA3rnpgzU
>>703955308
No but poor maintenance allows for a damaged reactor to leak an astonishing amount of radiation as seen in Chernobyl and japan.
>>703954102
Problem is that Navy reactors are ludicrously expensive, because they're built with ridiculously high quality materials, use weapons grade fuel, and are designed to be absolutely reliable, strongly intrinsically safe, absolutely leak proof, and be able to be run safely by bitter, angry, alcoholic 20 year olds.
>>703955308
>only 8 people have died
>3 mile island had no deaths
>>703951981
Actually we don't, we just need to get better at hot fusion than we currently are, which is slowly but surely happening in labs as we speak
>>703955308
>>nuclear power plants don't explode, it's not a fucking atomic bomb
>>703954102
serious question,why doesn't america do the same as russia and turn them into floating power plants?
>>703952989
Stupid nigger. Go die back to Africa.
>>703954149
Probably because you don't understand the tech. It's actually a pretty solid solution.
>>703952933
>ppl
Opinion discarded.
Go die in a hole, nigger-jew lover.
>>703955086
>can't build anything else there because those big turbines
>hundreds of them standing in fields of corn and soy beans
>fields of corn and soy beans
You what?
>>703955308
>only 8 people have died
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh, one second...
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
>>703951378
>Your fear
Assuming you think this board is filled with Wall Street tycoons. Nuclear power is a money blackhole unrivaled by any other kind of investment. Not a single plant has turned profit for even a second.
>>703954476
Really they should be dumping into the ocean.
Dilution is the solution.
>>703955552
he probably means as a direct result of the actual violent catastrophes, those figures are definitely misleading due to not accounting for deaths due to radioactive fallout; however in a fusion powered reactor, the product of the reaction is perfectly stable and not at all radioactive meaning that all you would have to worry about would be the direct explosion from an accident making those numbers much more relevant.
>>703955605
That was an explosion of a flammable gas, which could happen to your backyard grill if it was set on fire. It was not a nuclear bomb / chain reaction.
Are you trolling?
>>703954323
Not a single Fukushima cleanup worker has received a large enough dose to cause a statistically significant increase in their lifetime risk of developing cancer.
>>703955552
Yeah, the 5 who died, died during construction of a nuclear power plant. No one was affected from the radiation. You do know that there are more nuclear reactors in the US than just one, right?
>>703955496
>Chernobyl
Fucking socialists
>Japan
Yeah, GE really fucked that up. Jack Welch knew about it and didn't give two shits. Fuck him.
>>703955605
What is your point? Fukushima didn't explode like an atomic bomb.
Are you sure you passed 8th grade?
Fukushima was the result of oversight concerning the safety systems which should have been in place, coupled with the entire of Japan being built on a fault line.
Stop posting memes, greentexting and use your words, you inbred mongoloid nigger-jew lover shill sheep shitfuck.
>>703955918
wat
>>703954476
"Until the ice wall sets" is a pretty reasonable timeline.
Honestly, are the people in your countrys retarted or what if they cant tell the difference between the bomb and a nuclear power plant? wEhere iam from people are concerned about the waste it produces , that radiates for millions of years and nobody can build/ plan a storage that is save for such a time period. and if you just put that shit into an old mine or into the mountains you might aswell instantly poison your drinking water by yourself , cause then you dont get cancer and die fast, atleast.
Well fusion might be the way to go , althougv it will still take decades , german is quite advanced in tearms of fusion research...
>>703955605
>nuclear power plants don't explode
>>>703956015
>That was an explosion
>>703954476
In a different light, we can hold casks full of spent fuel and irradiated material easy. Barely takes any space.
AHAHAHAHHAHAHA do y'all even split atoms
>>703956193
"don't explode like an atmoic bomb"
It didnt. Thats a fucking hydrogen explosion.
>>703955118
Ex navy nukes already run all the LA d based reactors. Seriously, most of those guys are ex nukes. Rate is irrelevant. ET, EM, MM, hell, there are even ex nuke ICs, from when that was a thing.
>>703955331
It absolutely is not the cost. Yes, it's a large investment up front, but it's not prohibitive and they make money in the long run.
These things are not being build because of unpopular public opinion. That's why every country on earth that is nuclearly capable started shifting away from nuclear after fukushima. People are scared of this stuff because they don't know about it.
People aren't going to rallies and protests outside of nuclear construction sites and yelling about how prohibitively expensive it is.
>>703956070
I'm not anti-nuclear, but when people tell bold face lies like this, it makes me want to be.
Thousands of people died prematurely due to radiation released during the 3 miles island disaster.
>>703956193
Stop posting memes you piece of shit. There exist no respectable people who value your opinion, and that's all it is, uninformed, jew-shill influenced opinion. You will never be worth anything and you are surplus produced by a past age of prosperity. You will never contribute anything and you will live and die without the Earth realizing you are even there.
SOLAR ROADWAYS ARE THE ANSWER!!!!!!!!&)((:&;5):)$&!4)&64):&(
>>703956051
*cough cough* Chernobyl *cough*
>>703951378
is the megatons to megawatts program a lie?
It seems like an easy thing to fake, a few empty shells of weapons and a little mined uranium while telling the public you have "converted the warheads into fuel".
How can we trust the governments of the united states and russia to give us accurate numbers of weapons the keep when they are so secretive about it?
>>703955666
>Go die back to Africa.
implying africans don't control most of the world's uranium poltard
>>703955417
That would be unnecessary. The plants we have now are safe enough as it is.
>>703955441
No... No...
Tell me, who's constantly keeping those roads squeaky clean?
Not to mention, dumbass, there's a fixed amount of energy emitted from the sun on any given square foot of Earth, and all the US roads combined won't give enough power to power the US.
>>703955666
Satan has spoken
>>703955496
Maintenance had no effect on either of your listed examples edgelord Chernobyl was a drunk and Fukushima was Poseidon.
Libcuck
>>703956380
>"don't explode like an atmoic bomb"
except you never said that in your post
and a nuclear reactor exploding releases far more radiation than a nuclear bomb detonating
the fact that it was a hydrogen explosion, and not a nuclear chain reaction doesn't change that
>>703951378
It also produces vast amounts of waste and due to its slow reaction time to load change, can only operate as a base power. Gas plants will still required for quick response. I wouldn't call this an adequate solution.
>>703955666
Trips confirm Nuclear energy will save us!
>>703955831
No buildings, dipshit. No human or animal occupied structures allowed. That land is forever farm land unless they take down the turbines.
While certainly useful, barely developed farm land is like an uncut diamond, potentially worth considerably more than it's current state.
Because of this limitation, wind farms are all but useless in getting power to where people use it the most; Densely populated cities, thanks to our decrepit, and strained, power infrastructure
>>703952035
Scottish are investing in wave and tidal energy and are getting great results.
By 2030 all Scotland's power needs will be served by wave, wind and tidal turbines
>>703956478
~calm down~
>>703951378
Niggawatt
>>703955496
>astonishing amounts
do you have any sort of numbers or realistic concept of how much radiation is being released?
>>703956470
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/reactor-overheats-at-three-mile-island
Going to need your sauce where thousands of people died prematurely
>>703956465
I assure you it is the cost. I literally work for a nuclear power company.
>>703956664
They don't need to be clean. In fact, the dirtier and darker they are, dumbass, the more sunlight they'll absorb.
>>703956626
Maybe, but it would be a great marketing point and Nuclear power has suffered the most from bad marketing.
And in the event that an accident -did- happen, because despite our best intentions they do, a reactor breach under a hundred feet or so of water would be a lot less dangerous to the local environment
>>703956193
>an egg can crack easily, so nuclear power plants must be able to crack easily
>>703956781
>That land is forever farm land unless they take down the turbines.
so what?
>>703951378
You want Chernobyl?
This is how you get Chernobyl
>>703957170
Actually that's vodka comrade
>>703955537
> bitter, angry, alcoholic 20 year olds.
In some cases, yeah.
>>703957154
So cities grow over time. Eventually, that land owner is going to want to make more money from it than farming provides, be it energy, corn, or soy.
>>703957170
Chernobyl was never designed to produce power it was designed to in rich uranium for warheads. That's why Chernobyl exploded
>>703956470
>Thousands of people died prematurely due to radiation released during the 3 miles island disaster.
Nope. There is not a single valid source that claims that; just hyperbolic nuts. For that assumption to even begin to be true, a linear no threshold model of increase cancer risk relative to radiation exposure would have to be accurate, and it's not. Not even close.
The earth is constantly bathed in ionizing radiation from the stars, the sun, and naturally occurring radioactive material. The body can deal with low levels of radiation; otherwise, there would be no life on Earth. TMI didn't put out enough gas to exceed the threshold needed to cause an increase in lifetime cancer risk.
Time to blow the Navyfags' minds: ALARA is a guidance model used for regulations, and its authors said at the time (40s and 50s) that they knew it was wrong then, but just needed something conservative to work with until they got a handle on radiation.
>>703951378
Is Iran legitimately just trying to build its own domestic reactors?
Was Iraq trying to do the same with EDF?
Were the Israelis correct in bombing Iraq's nuclear plant while it was being developed by EDF?
Or perhaps most importantly how can not trust other countries to create nuclear weapons from fission when america,russia and britain did so?
is it these double standards that REALLY held nuclear power back?
>>703956465
>>703956978
I should expand, to say that I agree no one protests the cost, but rather the danger. However, we both know that protesters don't actually affect the outcome of anything 99.2% of the time, so their effect can basically be ignored. If a major utility wants to build a piece of super-infrastructure, it's gonna get built.
>>703955537
>>703957254
What if they were well paid 30-year-olds happy to be out of the Peer Quee... er, Navy
They can still be alcoholics if you really want though
>>703957153
THORIUM!!!
>>703956519
>>703956519
Let's not pretend that represents a scenario that's even remotely feasible in any other country. They intentionally disabled ALL the safety systems on a poorly designed, inherently unstable reactor, with the intention of doing a stupid, reckless test that COULD end in disaster (hint hint), but wouldn't so long as they met certain conditions going in. Then they didn't meet those conditions, knew it, and did it anyway.
>>703957689
>>703957689
>>703957569
We had two nuclear plants in Ohio
The Perry plant near Toledo was off-line 95% of the time and was eventually shut down, I believe.
The other was near Cincinnati and never did get approved to go online. The consortium that built and owned it eventually converted it to coal
>>703951378
Why are we (bongs) building the worst most overpriced meme reactor ever built?
Why are we subsidising this with corporate socialism which will hurt the poor in this country for 40 years?
And why the fuck are we trusting the chinese and the french to do it all?
>>703955441
good video, the narrator sounds like a faggot though
>>703957068
Wrong. Power is not produced via differential temperature, but via photon interactions. If photons can't penetrate, no potebtial difference, no power.
Jesus, whoever came up with "solar roads" has got to have as much common sense as a kid at the zoo who starts jerking off because the monkey's doing it.
i was once in a cooling tower.. Was cold, wet & nice
10/10 would enter again
>inb4 cancer
https://youtu.be/pVbLlnmxIbY
>>703957869
>>703957869
You know Russians, they think they are immune from their own stupidity.
>>703958082
The French actually know what they are doing when it comes to nuke power plants. They settled on one design that works, they know exactly how much it will cost to build, which prevents contractors from cutting corners, and they know how to run them correctly.
Too bad they are getting over run with Mo Ham Mads who will eventually infiltrate them and try to wreck them
>>703951378
You have two options:
1. the united states nuclear arsenal is reduced by half but the resulting saved fissile material reduces the cost of building nuclear plants by 20 percent and more exist.
2.the current situation with power plants and nuclear war.
choose wisely.
>>703955441
Imagine a 40 ton tractor-trailer trying to drive on slick, snow-covered glass.
You have that image?
That's why solar roads won't work
>>703957068
Nice b8
>>703955394
1. In general I think this is more a political topic than anything else. I don't think it is a major detractor to nuclear energy given that going from nothing to powerplant to weapons is a very difficult road, and no rogue nation is going to pull that off without every goverment in the world knowing about it. That's why all eyes are on north korea right now.
2. That's a pretty loaded question. 'Unfair' is pretty ambiguous. Short answer, I'm for subsidies for nuclear plants. I'm pro nuclear, so I'm pro nuclear plants being built faster and in greater numbers.
3. Hopefully with increase in popularity of smaller modular reactors and new tech designs from up and comer companies, we will see more competition. They are giants in the industry, though...soooo...
4. Unfortunately the narrative that applies to so many other industries applies to nuclear as well. first world countries exploiting and benefitting from 2nd and 3rd world ones. It doesn't sit well with be, but if I were paralyzed by the fact, then I wouldn't be able to do much of anything in my life, now would i? Still, it doesn't sit well, but it is not my area of expertise or passion.
5. Interesting ideas. I like smaller reactors more than i like floating reactors, but just because i like going home at night. Technologically speaks, they are both cool ideas.
6. murkan.
>>703958230
You would know who created if you watched the video. So you admittedly didn't watch it, relying on your own "knowledge" and criticise from your pedestal. You sir, have gone full retard.
>>703958520
or option nr3: dont be a retarded country , thus dont have nukes and make research on non nuclear tech and dont have war
>>703951378
>cleanest, safest, and most reliable electricity the world has ever seen.
Nope that's solar
>>703955918
You laugh, but really, that would be a viable short term option. Deep dump into the ocean. If you the the ocean gives a fuck about the comparatively minute volume of slightly contaminated water being produced by the fukushima cleanup efforts, then you're either retarded or high.
>>703951378
Four words Liquid fluoride thorium reactor. Look it up.
>>703951378
Why did they put a loli on the side of a reactor in france?
>>703958520
Nuclear warheads and nuclear power utilize different uranium isotopes, mate.
>>703952596
The rag heads flying planes into our buildings and blowing themselves up just to kill us aren't going to give a fuck about dying with us.
>>703959418
because it's fucking france
>>703956189
People appear to have quite the misconception about
a. how 'hot' or how radioactive our nuclear waste is and for how long.
b. how much of it we actually produce.
c. how close we are to being abe to commercially utilize spend fuel as new fuel in more efficient reactors.
>>703952314
Kek, That's why they are built on flat bare land
>>703959193
>Solar
>Reliable
>>703956372
I'LL TAKE ONE THOUSAND SMOKE DETECTORS PLEASE
>>703959708
Please don't use obscene launguage obvliviously.
>>703959829
The sun shines every single day and I guess you've never heard of a battery.
>>703959274
You both are fucking idiots. They run the water through filters to get the radioactive material out, you don't just store it in a tank, fuck-wit. You store the filters, though. But they're a lot smaller than a tank of water.
>>703956397
Yeah i know. Proven reliability and attention to detail. When you run one of these things constantly with the boat making all sorts of batshit crazy maneuvers, then watching a plant on land run at the same power all day is cake.
>>703959829
>nuclear waste
>clean
>>703959859
No, fuck you.
>>703959620
>nuclear warheads are a waste of nuclear material trying to scare other countries.
>space exploration is a waste of fossil fuel exploring what is a mostly barren landscape.
>the great and life changing invention of the internet is reduced to people shitposting bane threads.
life is full of disappointment.
>>703959729
Yeah, using spent fuel rods in another reactor would be awesome. Too bad U.S. law prohibits it from happening.
>>703952035
Hydroelectric is worth it. You just can't stick it anywhere since you need a river.
>>703960270
whait theres also a little bit of porn on the internet , so its a small victory
>>703960270
except the fact that you're probably posting from a cell phone that wouldn't have existed without the space program... so, there's that.
>>703957475
And not a single navyfag's mind was blow.
We all understand that alara is overly conservative , as is the linear no threshhold model.
Radiation hormesis is a more accurate model, but that's also very obviously a terrible model to base safety and regulator policies on.
I'll only be in the RC for a minute. I'm just trying to up my daily dose a bit.
>okay maybe not a full minute
>>703960243
Degenerate.
So what about the waste?
>>703952592
>what is a fault line
>why shouldn't you build on it
when your plant is located in fucking Japan, there really isn't anywhere safe for it...
Plus, only one of their engineers is required to be certified, the rest are just manual labor grunts. Every US worker at the plant has to be re-certified several times a year. There isn't one douche making all the decisions in a casualty scenario
>>703959831
that's the radioactive boyscout, taylor got his supply of uranium from abandoned mines of "hot rocks" in nevada.
He did it because medical isotopes are rare and expensive and one of his relations had cancer not because of the power system.
>>703951378
Remember, politics is also to blame.
>A Thorium reactor does not produce the radioactive waste of a Uranium fission reactor.
>Thorium cannot be weaponized to make nuclear devices
>Uranium can be weaponized
>the process to refine Uranium for reactor fuel and nuclear weapons is almost exactly the same
>nations want to be able to produce nuclear weapons
>politicians want to build Uranium reactors so they have an excuse to have Uranium refinement facilities
tl;dr >Thorium reactors are better but governments don't want them
>>703957144
I think that idea also poses some new problems though. Off the top of my head, a meltdown on land is already difficult enough to clean up. Now you sink it into a million gallons of water which will all now be considered contaminated. Then the problem of the containment lake itself..it's much more difficult, time consuming, and costly to fix and breaches or leeching problems.
And most glaringly, it is very expensive to build a reactor...and now you want build a speciallized hold lake and float that expensive reactor in it? I think it becomes prohibitively expensive at a certain point.
>>703954102
Fuck ya...
EB here
>>703952232
Security at a nuclear power plant is like a small army. I had a temp job at a nuclear plant one time and my supervisor sent me on an errand to the control room. He thought he had gotten me security clearance but he hadn't, and when I tried to use my badge to get in, a guard came out real ready to shoot me. He didn't think he'd have to, but he was clearly ready to.
>>703952314
government cannot weaponize Thorium, so they don't want to use it
>>703954476
Saw a piece on Vice where a guy was working on using the spent radioactive waste as fuel. Too lazy to look it up though
>>703956718
Thinking the large nuclear plants we have now are the only kinds. Thinking the physics prohibits a nuclear power plant from load following.
A bunch of dumb motherfuckers who think they can science ITT
>>703952826
learn to science
>>703953062
not counting dirty bombs....
If you have the facility to make reactor fuel, you can use it to make weapons grade as well. Governments like this idea and want the option
>>703961560
But anon, I have a piece of paper that says I can science.
>>703951378
Is geothermal energy still a thing. I remember learning about it in school...and well that was years upon years ago.
>>703961828
it is, but it churns out peanuts compared to other options
>>703961783
And which shitty us uni thought you deserved it?
>>703956829
>By 2030 all Scotland's power needs will be served by wave, wind and tidal turbines
LOLno.
That said, Scotland is almost entirely surrounded by rowdy seas. That might be a viable option for them. But that's new tech, we will need to wait for some data to come out when these systems are finally implemented in full (much later than 2030, i'd bet money on it)
\
>>703958072
The Perry plant is on the other side of the state, it was a two reactor plant but they never finished the second one, the other is still running. There's another plant near Sandusky
>>703960736
Ooh boy, that's a pretty big word.
>>703962069
You're lying. I've lived in Ohio my whole life and I know there's no plants here. I know this land like the backside of my dogs dick. Stay off the chan.
>>703958974
I looked at the video, and it didn't mention what would happen if it was covered in dirt. Anon's comment still stands, as potential difference is generated by photons, not temperature. Sure, snow wouldn't be a problem, as it could easily be melted by the panels, but what about mud?
>>703956978
Well sure. Yes it is the cost. But why are costs considered prohibitive by power companies?
At a more basic level, it is fear of nuclear power and opposition that leads to higher costs. Companies don't get fat subsidies to mitigate short term cost of construction without support from local and regional politicians. And you dont get that support when the people elect some green peace warriors.
>>703962211
Well I'll explain since you're too illiterate to understand, it means you're scum.
>>703962211
For you
>>703952314
Then how we going to make plutonium?
LFTR is the future!
>>703954807
Turn it into a weapon and you can get unlimited funding
>>703962571
I just wasted 20 minutes of your time you dumbass! I was only pretending to think that was the solution, and you took the bait!
>>703959274
No filter is perfect, and that water is still considered controlled. That's where dumping comes in
>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY
Gee i wonder.....
>>703963323
I understand your reference, clever anon
Kek
