Biden Moves to Save Nuclear Power

[Big Bend Texas]

Nuke plants are such clear weak points that debate is ridiculous. Enemies and terrorists are handed juicy targets. The plant's operation is totally dependent upon a select and very small group of experts. Power is concentrated in the hands of anonymous entrepreneurs. There has never been a permanent solution to the waste. For the nation, they represent security problems that exceed their worth. Conservation alone would more than make up for elimination of their electrical generation.
The problem in the world is not a lack of essentials, it is the desire for too much.

All large electrical generation plants and gas plants are prime terrorist targets no matter what fuel they use.

 

[Big Bend Texas]

Kyzr
Funny how everyone wants to bury their heads in the sand. I have pointed them to links on the many deaths attributed to nuclear reactors. I have pointed out how deadly the waste is.
Yes we have a big problem with adding how many EVs.
But everyone is convinced that their idea is right no matter what

How many deaths have been caused in the US because of the use of nuclear fuel?

How do those compare with deaths caused by non nuclear plants?

 

[FA_Q2]

Exactly how many nuclear reactors does the US have that can run off nuclear waste? Let me clue you in. None. How many are being built at the moment in the the US? None. How long do the env studies and other permitting take before a plant can even begin to be built? Many years. As much as ten to fifteen in some cases and in some cases it may never be built.
To say that there is no nuclear waste from any type of nuclear power plant is an absolute absurdity. To claim that it is not hazardous to humans is just as absurd.
As I have stated wind and solar are nice cottage industries.

No one claimed there was no waste.

What was claimed, shown and you still ignore is that there are good ways to implement nuclear power.

I know you want to ignore those facts and then point to Chernobyl but no one is buying that nonsense. You have nothing to say against modern nuclear power so you run to decades old problems.

Sorry, that is simply not going to cut it.

 

[there4eyeM]

With the billions they make from energy generation I have to wonder why they need a federal bail out.

The insurance provided by government (since no company will insure them, understandably), should also count big.

 

[CowboyTed]

We need to replace the old outdated light water reactors

The technology is not there yet... We are getting close but think about the headaches we have caused for future generations with the thousands of years half life bunkers...

If Nuclear had to actually pay for that upfront it would never get off the ground... We are getting better and replenishment plants look like a possible future...

There is no doubt that nuclear is in our medium future by the looks of it...

The big thing with energy is to not listen to what the various lobbyists say about there different ways of generation... They spend huge amount of time dumping on each other.

There is so many stories about wind power it is funny but Denmark are above 50% electricity coming from wind (Wind power in Denmark - Wikipedia.)
Denmark have made a business out of it and it is a major employer... They design and make them... Bu the big thing is they use cooperatives to mange and maintain them, not big corporations. This would have lobbyists in US go mental, imagine communities working together creating local jobs with local ownership... That would need to be shut down from the start...

 

[CowboyTed]

How do you recycle fiberglass, Einstein?

Recycling it in Europe...

By the way operationally those blades are used a lot longer than the ten year warranty... It is generally 20 years before they are checked more regularly...

Even after that they are recycling them more and more...

Also a blade running 20 years is far greener than coal for the out put of energy...

Lets stop thinking that any energy source can be 100% environmentally friendly, but letting some energy production destroy the planet for all of us because Wind Turbine blades aren't fully recycled...

What I want to know, if a coal fire plant pollutes the air in my town and I don't work for the plant and don't get subsidised energy from the plant. Who is paying me for the poor air quality and the extra sickness I have to take on? Why do they get to freeload on me? Why don't I get some of there profits on the cost they put on me?

 

[Weatherman2020]

Recycling it in Europe...

By the way operationally those blades are used a lot longer than the ten year warranty... It is generally 20 years before they are checked more regularly...

Even after that they are recycling them more and more...

Also a blade running 20 years is far greener than coal for the out put of energy...

Lets stop thinking that any energy source can be 100% environmentally friendly, but letting some energy production destroy the planet for all of us because Wind Turbine blades aren't fully recycled...

What I want to know, if a coal fire plant pollutes the air in my town and I don't work for the plant and don't get subsidised energy from the plant. Who is paying me for the poor air quality and the extra sickness I have to take on? Why do they get to freeload on me? Why don't I get some of there profits on the cost they put on me?

You can’t recycle fiberglass in anything close to an eco friendly manner. And you’re an idiot to parrot the mythical manmade climate change bs.
We had only 10 years to act in 2008 and failed. So get over it, we’re finished. So party like theirs no tomorrow because there’s not.

 

[candycorn]

We've had nuke power on navy ships for like 70 years. Extremely few incidents. As long as we transfer that level of command and control to land-based plants, it will be as safe as possible.

 

[kyzr]

With the billions they make from energy generation I have to wonder why they need a federal bail out.

They need a bailout because they are too expensive to operate due to lack of reasonable regulations, especially regarding waste storage and disposal. Nuke plants need new fuel and cost-effective ways to dispose of their spent fuel.
Yucca Mt. was supposed to be a safe, cheap, storage site, until Harry Reid stopped it. Maybe now the democrats will act to keep nuclear power viable, otherwise its more fossil fuel powerplants.

 

[kyzr]

All large electrical generation plants and gas plants are prime terrorist targets no matter what fuel they use.

Nuke plants have 2' thick concrete walls, and large security staffs.
Maybe if the border was closed we'd be less worried about terrorists?

 

[Aldo Raine]

More people have died in Ted Kennedy’s car than in American nuclear power plants.

Actually that is 100% true.
MAGA

 

[JWBooth]

Thorium Liquid Salt reactors.
No harmful waste, and can be scaled down to run power for a small city.
Development was ignored because there was nothing there to convert to bombs.

 

[Maxdeath]

No one claimed there was no waste.

What was claimed, shown and you still ignore is that there are good ways to implement nuclear power.

I know you want to ignore those facts and then point to Chernobyl but no one is buying that nonsense. You have nothing to say against modern nuclear power so you run to decades old problems.

Sorry, that is simply not going to cut it.

Lol. You are still hiding from the fact that there are no reactors that use the wast from our current reactors. That waste is very toxic. Even the waste from those reactors that utilize waste from our current reactors produces waste that is very toxic. The lifetime of that toxicity is longer then most written language.
You are also trying to say that because nothing Terrible has happened in years that means nothing ever will.
There was a time when people believed that there was no harm from burning petroleum products. There was a time when people thought asbestos was a miracle and put it into everything. There was a time when lead was great.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Lol. You are still hiding from the fact that there are no reactors that use the wast from our current reactors. That waste is very toxic. Even the waste from those reactors that utilize waste from our current reactors produces waste that is very toxic. The lifetime of that toxicity is longer then most written language.
You are also trying to say that because nothing Terrible has happened in years that means nothing ever will.
There was a time when people believed that there was no harm from burning petroleum products. There was a time when people thought asbestos was a miracle and put it into everything. There was a time when lead was great.

About 70,000 tons of nuclear waste in the US.
Diddly squat.

 

[kyzr]

About 70,000 tons of nuclear waste in the US.
Diddly squat.

A hot mess by any other name.

 

[Weatherman2020]

A hot mess by any other name.

Why?

 

[kyzr]

Why?

Because spent fuel and long-term nuclear waste storage is NOT resolved.
Currently the utility is responsible for storing its nuclear waste, expensive and inefficient.
We need the Federal government to step up and approve long term storage facilities, like Yucca Mt. NV.
Nuclear powerplants generate many "green" MW of electricity, so why aren't the aging nuke plants being replaced?
What major power generation source are the greenies considering? Time is running out...

Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage and Disposal • Stimson Center

400,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel is stored at hundreds of sites across dozens of countries. Given its radioactive properties, spent fuel must be stored and protected for the thousands. Deep underground storage will help centralize stockpiles, and some are being planned, but the challenge of...

www.stimson.org

 

[Blues Man]

The technology is not there yet... We are getting close but think about the headaches we have caused for future generations with the thousands of years half life bunkers...

If Nuclear had to actually pay for that upfront it would never get off the ground... We are getting better and replenishment plants look like a possible future...

There is no doubt that nuclear is in our medium future by the looks of it...

The big thing with energy is to not listen to what the various lobbyists say about there different ways of generation... They spend huge amount of time dumping on each other.

There is so many stories about wind power it is funny but Denmark are above 50% electricity coming from wind (Wind power in Denmark - Wikipedia.)
Denmark have made a business out of it and it is a major employer... They design and make them... Bu the big thing is they use cooperatives to mange and maintain them, not big corporations. This would have lobbyists in US go mental, imagine communities working together creating local jobs with local ownership... That would need to be shut down from the start...

Because spent fuel and long-term nuclear waste storage is NOT resolved.
Currently the utility is responsible for storing its nuclear waste, expensive and inefficient.
We need the Federal government to step up and approve long term storage facilities, like Yucca Mt. NV.
Nuclear powerplants generate many "green" MW of electricity, so why aren't the aging nuke plants being replaced?
What major power generation source are the greenies considering? Time is running out...

Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage and Disposal • Stimson Center

400,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel is stored at hundreds of sites across dozens of countries. Given its radioactive properties, spent fuel must be stored and protected for the thousands. Deep underground storage will help centralize stockpiles, and some are being planned, but the challenge of...

www.stimson.org

Funny how how France has over 70% of their electricity produced by nuclear power and they don't have any issues with waste.

They actually recycle much of it and then use some of that to tap into the billion dollar a year medical isotopes markets but our idiot politicians have made it illegal to do that in the US.

There Is No Such Thing as Nuclear Waste - WSJ

www.wsj.com