What is your opinion on nuclear power Veeky Forumsnners?

>as long as the people running arent idiots (they wont be) nothing will go wrong.

I'm so glad that all forms of industrial and commercial accidents have disappeared from humanity because why would you ever hire an idiot to run anything. Literally nothing will ever go wrong now.

best type of energy available on earth.

Should be an important stepping stone towards more renewable forms of energy. Sustainable fusion would be pretty neat, and mostly eliminate the waste problem. If only there was a way to stop people freaking the fuck out when they hear the word 'radiation.'

It took well over 100 years to build up the massive amount of infrastructure and technology we have for extracting, distributing, and using fossil fuels. Wouldn't be surprised if it takes us another 100 or so to get off them.

I don't trust Iran to build one. They might just do some shitty small one just so they can say that's why they want urianium, but it's still dangeruse.

>Worst thing that happens with a solar plant

A bird poos on a panel or gets barbecued.

>Worst thing that happens with a dam

A massive flood.

>Worst thing that happens with nuclear power

A fucking nightmare for the rest of human history.

>Worst thing that happens with wind power

The filthy dutch.

It's not a matter of opinion. It is simply necessary. The only way we could do without polluting and harmful energy is a drastic population reduction. We need large populations for military strategic reasons, to be blunt a bunch of do-gooder hippies living in harmony with nature, would soon be wiped out by more aggressive populations, in a war over resources. The only sustainable way to end pollution is a world government new world order. But we do not want that. We want our trucks and freedom, because murica, and yeah, I understand. I'm with you.

Trumpfaggots leave REEEEEEEEEEEEEE

stop blabbering about politics, this is a thread about nuclear energy

>sustainable fusion
yeah, zero point free energy will be cool when that's never actually invented too. For the people who are forced to deal with the "current" energy demand, it's a great solution.

Sorry, the question was about opinions, and imho one can not comment on energy without touching on politics or sociology. Maybe I should have assumed the question concerned only the technical aspects of the topic since this is /sci but I honestly did not expect the crowd here to be that narrow minded.

Its useful and the safest source of energy as well as having little pollutants beyond some waste which can just be put in death valley or some similar shit.

Just don't place it close enough to a population center so if in the extremely rare case of an accident it doesn't fuck everyone over like fukushima. deadly accidents are extremely rare, but considering how shit the accidents are they need to be a safe distance.

>A massive flood.
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koshi_Barrage
>Killed 250 people

Which is more than Fukushima has killed, or is even projected to kill.

...

It's simply the most efficient source of energy.

>Oh becouse it doesn't follow your liberal ideology it's bad?

Is nuclear power a liberal conspiracy we must crush or something held back by liberals that we, as warriors of justice, must free? I'm not sure where I should direct my impotent rage at as Trump hasn't told me what to think yet.

this

More like 8.2 million deaths per year.

>Government pays for the construction of a plant
Wouldn't have to if government would just allow people to build the plants without getting blocked halfway through construction due to a change in government. No private investor has confidence because of this. I agree that it's a stupid system but it's stupid because of the government, not because of the industry.

That's more than 7x the amount of people that die in Japan each year.

Is this a bad meme?

>What is your opinion on nuclear power Veeky Forumsnners?
Mixed. On one hand, they're really safe on paper.
On the other hand, once you have a real power plant with idiots at the controls and management cutting corners on the maintenance, they become a whole lot less safe.

If nuclear power wasnt so politically untenable, it would be the clear method of choice for cutting emissions.

The other major issue is that the designs we are using are well out of date. I know everyone is sick of hearing about LFTR and other molten salts, including the plutonium breeding chloride salt versions, but there's a reason why the side in the know keeps banging on about them- they should never have been mothballed in the first place. They are the clear choice for base load power while ever renewables remain intermittent and diffuse (and they will).

Nuclear fall out is global.