Why the fuck do people still shit on nuclear energy?

>tfw when you know jackshit and use a moot point of reasoning
read a fucking book dipshit, as other anons have said its because people are absolute fucking retards and politicians doubly so. even when in places where they are using the technology they dont even use it properly

The NRC was formed in the 70's and has prevented any new nuclear power plants since then
Nothing to do with Solar or Wind or whatever else

They literally didn't permit ANY new power plants for 35+ years
And they are killing the ones they approved recently because thats what their organization is for.

>people are absolute fucking retards and politicians doubly so. even when in places where they are using the technology they dont even use it properly
So we shouldn't be using nuclear because of retards everywhere? I agree.

>piece
Pieces.
You're welcome, namefriend.

desu yes, for example I live in southwestern ontario and all of our active nuclear stations everyday have to offload A LOT of energy into the great lakes as heat (something they were not designed to do on a consistent basis) because the government decided they would pay out on contracts to wind farms first. Its literally ass backwards to the way it should work for maximum efficiency and no one has any idea what the environmental impact of heating the lakes will be in the long term. All based on the sheer idiocy of the general public and political establishment. People are retards in general but as soon as the word nuclear comes into the conversation its an order of magnitude worse, ie how MRI is actually NMRI for the same reasons.

dumbfuck

just to be clear most designs of fission reactors cant detonate, the absolute worst case scenario is you flood the station with super heated irradiated steam which is than pulled into a vacuum building. Obviously anyone inside is dead and the station is a write off but the damage to the local area is minimal to non existant

Why solar and not some other renewable such as wind?

desu senpai what if we started calling nuclear power something else, along the same lines?

>absolute worst case scenario
>not an earthquake, human error, tsunami, tornado, equipment malfunction or hurricane
lol

Dunno. Might have something to do with all the nuclear waste that will outlive human civilization. But hey, if you like it so much, maybe you can bury it in your backyard.

In Soviet Russia, nuclear energy shits on you.

Joking aside, media scare tactics play a big role.

That combined with people's lack of understanding makes it seem like dangerous voodoo black magic.

Also if there were better ways to minimize the waste it might seem more "clean".

I like how the public cannot benefit from nuclear, yet every submarine and aircraft carrier built since 1975 is nuclear powered.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_naval_reactors

"There are no commissioned conventional (non-nuclear) submarines or aircraft carriers left in the U.S. Navy"

The military wants to keep the good shit to itself.

No, the military is the only organization that has the clout to tell the oil industry to fuck off. That's the problem here in the US, the oil industry doesn't want its profits cut into so it funds """"""""""Green""""""""""" energy and anti-nuclear groups.

Nah, we'll just use reactors that generate minuscule waste or none at all and build better reactors that can use waste as fuel, as we have been doing. But hey, keep on burning coal to fuel those wind turbines, the Koch Brothers told you that it's "Carbon negative" after all!

>has the clout to tell the oil industry to fuck off
As we use our military to protect our oil interests.

Look at Saudi Arabia. We are fighting/funding wars all around them. It's not because we need the oil and it's not because we think their way of life is great. We just want to claim a spot on the geographic Go board.

>You can either use coal (which we all know is being phased out) or you can use nuclear energy, but NOTHING ELSE
Know how I know that literally every single fucking pro-nuclear thread online is typed up by the nuclear energy lobbyists?

Sure. They can feel free to bury it in my back yard. I'm not concerned about the radiated energy from something with a half life of millions of years.

don't forget a lot of recent reactors and WIPs are expensive nightmares, just think that one EDF has been working on in Finland for decades

Why not go buy a nuclear superfund site and build a house? You could do it real cheap! I'm kind of surprised you pro-nuclear people wouldn't have jumped on the real estate investment opportunity of a lifetime yet!

I live in concord mass.

Nevada and Arizona have huge tracts of unpopulated area away from groundwater that will probably never be populated. We know how to build landfills, and we know how to safely transport nuclear waste. To insinuate that we can't handle the decreasing amounts of nuclear byproduct that comes with each advancement in the field is simply absurd.

I don't know why you're so insistent on throwing your hands in the air and declaring this an insurmountable obstacle that should never be attempted and immediately abandoned.

Well I guess that's that, huh? Nothing to worry about. There are, after all, never accidents during transit or spillage on-site at plants or multiple sites in America polluted into the foreseeable future or anything. Go nukes!

Away. Go away.

Yea well thats what a marxist government does

He's right though. For every nuclear reactor there's a 50% chance of a major accident happening: either it happens or it doesn't.

What should be happening is your shit getting shut down and tore to the ground.

Because it's an unprofitable government tit sucking dinosaur that only really exists to provide plutonium for bombs.

>china
>hydroelectric
>$28/MWh

holy FUUUUUUCK
no wonder they can make fuck all for pennies at a time

>>china
>>hydroelectric
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banqiao_Dam
>estimated 171,000 deaths and 11 million displaced

You are most likely the dumbest poster on Veeky Forums.

>huge upfront investment
>takes a decade to build

the whole business model is so fucked up no one is even sure of the cost of a single kwh, not to mention how long it takes before the investment returns. all the nuclear power plants are state sponsored, and most attempts to sell them to the private capital fails because no one want to touch this shit.

the only way they could actually start making money is through state interventionism and banning/putting prohibitive prices on the co2 emissions.

Safety you fucking mongo

...

Why do you think fucking nuke lobbyists make these fucking propaganda threads all over the internet every single fucking day?

t. oil lobbyist

exactly!

No. Fuck you both.

Oh really? Then list me every single thing that can go wrong in a LFTR. And don't invent your own imaginary flaws.

lol what the fuck, you think that just because a material has a half life of a billion years it will be incredibly dangerous for a billion years? No.

Radiation is spread out across time. The bigger the half-life, the less radiation is emitted. The shorter the half-life, the more radiation is emitted.

Therefore, all nuclear waste which is radioactive and can kill you, will stop being radioactive in 100 years (Mostly Cesium-137 with its half life of 30 years, other isotopes have even shorter half lives)

Oh so it's only pollution for a century. Well, I feel much better now!

That's if we keep using these nuclear reactors which produce useless waste.

The LFTR reactors don't produce *any* radioactive waste.

Also don't forget that there are reactor designs that basically burn waste for their fuel

t. """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Green"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" energy stooge

The Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese built over 30 individual reactors each under 6 years.

Even the Russians build them fast.

Only in the west is there problems.
And while we don't use nuclear power we burn coal which pollutes even more.

What is your magic solution? To go back to the stoneage? Because that's what the likes of Greenpeace wants.

Renewable energy in its current state is a waste of taxpayer money.

The chinese can build reactors fast because they don't have 40 year old government-funded regulatory committee that can shut down any project they want for no reason at all

If only the NRC was run like the FAA

is the LFTR thing not just a meme? I remember being slightly obsessed with that shit in high school but then I heard nothing about it for years.
100 years is fucking nothing in storage

All power generation is heavily subsidized and since renewables started competing for the same subsidies, things like Coal and Nuclear have been suffering for it. Battling for subsidies has always been a pretty heavily political thing.

That graph isn't nationwide.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies

>coal and natgas gets 1/6th of the subsidies the renewables and nuclear get
>contributes 70% of the market energy

china has 700 engineers working on LFTR apparently, and they predict 2040-2045 the first reactors will start coming out of production lines

and there are absolutely never any accidents in the coal industry too

But user what if it EXPLODES into l-like a NUCLEAR EXPLOSION and shiet?!?the entire world could die!imagine a entire country the size of britain getting nuked and being erased of existence!

this is what normies actually believe

because political reasons. Go to /pol/, they should tell you.

>And while we don't use nuclear power we burn coal which pollutes even more.
Not for long. That's leaving whether you shill or not.

So what? I'm not a coal shill.

You guys just keep on those scripted talking points. Maybe one day...

...

Nobody's losing anything. The fact that you nuke shills constantly try to claim that actual renewable energy is not even an option, when Germany produces more solar power than FUCKING AMERICA while having the solar incidence of fucking ALASKA proves you're lying sacks of piss with a financial axe to grind.

I'm sorry, but you're not getting your fucking way. PISS OFF.

Yeah, real progress Germany is making.

cleantechnica.com/2017/05/08/germany-breaks-solar-record-gets-85-electricity-renewables/

Just keep on shilling, shill.

>on one day
bravo

France does it cleaner everyday for years

>baseload generation is obsolete!

Careful, there's someone here who actually believes this.

These guys really need to put down the physics books and pick up some economics books.

>not using energy is the most expensive form of energy of all.

????

How does that statement make any sense? An even might have a 2% probability of happening.

It is dangerous, releases more co2 than renewables, and incredibly polluting even without disasters.

>on one day

Even so, it means renewables are providing most of the energy most of the time.
It's bigger than non-renewables *today*,
and the trend is not reversing.

>Nuclear
>EVER paying for itself
Choose one nuclear cuck

Remember Fukushima? The worst that came out of it was the damages caused by the panicking masses more so than the actual emergency.

I guess we should ban cars since they cause so many deaths. It's fine, we'll manage with bicycles. Sure, it's way less efficient, but we'll be safe from accidents!

It's always great to see how nucucks get so triggered that they can only argue with strawmans

You still haven't rebutted and

>Muh CO2
A non-issues when considering nuclear vs non-nuclear.
>Muh half-life
See above.

Now find me a single nuclear plant that actually made enough to pay for construction costs, fuel, energy production itself, storage and ultimatly deconstruction. [spoiler]You can`t[/spoiler].
It's a taxpayer funded scam, promoted by gullible and edgy brainlets.

nuclear energy is dangerous goy

by the same reasoning all of manhattan shouldnt exist because there might be a giant earthquake there tomorrow and cause a catastrophe

>spillage
is this a joke? are you forming your opinion based on the simpsons? Would it surprise you to know fissile material is shipped all over the place globally every day? Would it surprise you to know that there is a HUGE amount of fissile material that is missing?

Tell me more about this apparently liquid waste you seem to think exists, and elaborate on how a deep geological repository can cause meaningful pollution. Read a book so you dont sound like a complete ignoramus in the future

holy shit you cant be this dumb, the question with renewable sources isnt the number of megawatts you can generate its how to store the energy for use during periods when you cant generate.

You also apparently have literally no conception of how the modern power grid works in that there isnt just some invariant constant power that needs to be delivered. I actually despise people like you because you ostensibly have the power to vote and directly hurt the body politic via your willful ignorance

Ah yes of course there is the option of using wind and solar and just sitting in the dark when neither the sun nor the wind is available. How could I forget.

Nuclear energy is literally the safest method of providing a base load.

Do you have some sources on that? Not doubting just want to read more.

>adding renewable subsidies to nuclear subsidies for no reason when nuclear subsidies are less than half of coal and natural gas
Fuck off oil shill

>Hydro (w/o Banqiao)
this is a bad graph and whoever made it should feel bad

>It is dangerous
False

>releases more co2 than renewables
False

>and incredibly polluting even without disasters.
False

Why are you lying?

>Even so, it means renewables are providing most of the energy most of the time.
No it doesn't you massive retard.

releases more co2 than renewables

how does it release any co2 at all?
can somebody explain is there something involved during the production of the rods or some other shit?

It's just a retard lying through his teeth. He does this in every nuclear thread.

That was actually party in fault due to Naoto Kan's decision to not vent the reactor buildings, causing hydrogen gas to build up.

If the buildings had been vented the explosion most likely would not have occurred.

The guy even had the gall to claim that he "saved Tokyo" afterwards.

>cost, pollution, politics and etc. of mining rare radioactive elements
>politics and etc. of having nuclear fuel
>cost, politics, limited locations and etc. of building the nuclear plants
>politics, public disapproval and etc. of having nuclear plants
>cost, politics, area of effect, time frame of effects and etc. when shit hits the fan
Now go back to /pol/.

But user, uranium is about as common as tin

>cost, pollution, politics and etc. of mining rare radioactive elements
>cost, politics, limited locations and etc. of building the nuclear plants
>cost, politics, area of effect, time frame of effects and etc. when shit hits the fan
Relative to what?

>politics and etc. of having nuclear fuel
>>politics, public disapproval and etc. of having nuclear plants
Well I guess we should stop doing abortions since they're politically controversial. Not an argument.

All you do is repeat the same lies over and over again, ignoring whenever you get BTFO.

>/pol/ logic

>Relative to what?
I'm talking absolute, not relative.

>Well I guess we should stop doing abortions since they're politically controversial.
I guess we should legalize savory, child porn, rape, murder, thievery, every drug, and give every country nuclear warheads because they're politically controversial; which is not a reason to not do things. It's not like they're politically controversial for a reason or anything.

Jesus, /pol/tards are thick in the skull. All you do is repeat the same lies over and over again, ignoring whenever you get BTFO.

...

I wonder how much of the stigma around nuclear power comes from the fact that (I think) sometimes nuclear power programs are/(were used to be?) put into action as a sort of pre-requisite to nuclear armament production.

>France
>75% of nuclear energy
>lowest electricity price in Europe
>low pollution
Why your country don't use nuclear ?

nuclear is shit and you should feel bad if you are pro-nuclear

also, fuck coal and active solar.