Nuclear waste is incredibly safe and disasters simply don’t happen anymore because of how strict safety protocols are
downpunxx@fedia.io 2 months ago
I am not a supporter of terrestrial nuclear power, too many possibility for disaster, and poisonous waste by product.
We have all the energy we could ever need being bathed by the sun.
It's right there, all we have to do is harness it, store it, then distribute it. That's it.
All else is distraction and folly.
rbesfe@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
The_Terrible_Humbaba@slrpnk.net 2 months ago
This getting heavily downvoted with no replies shows just how much of anti-nuclear is simply based on propaganda and fear mongering, not science. Nuclear is the second safest energy source in the world, nearly tied with solar for first, and actually was the first until not too long ago. And that is despite the heavy investment into renewables and disinvestment into nuclear. If anyone is that worried about the dangers of nuclear to people and the environment, they should turn their attention to hydro-energy (not to speak of fossil fuels, obviously).
What are even the major disasters regarding nuclear? One, Chernobyl, was in the USSR in the 80s; does any remember what phones looked like in the 80s? The other was in Fukushima, which is located in a country known for earthquakes and tsunamis, and it was not build to handle such events; and it still was nowhere near as bad as Chernobyl. I think I’ve also heard about one in the UK, but that was in the fucking 50s, and even smaller than Fukushima.
Crashumbc@lemmy.world 2 months ago
The US had the 3 mile island disaster in the 70s. But I think the actual radioactive release was negligible.
downpunxx@fedia.io 2 months ago
fukishima was only 13 years ago, go sell your bullshit someplace else, i ain't buyin
intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Fukushima was not a nuclear waste storage site
kaffiene@lemmy.world 2 months ago
It’s all very well claiming that nuclear waste storage is safe but you can’t guarantee anything can be kept safe for 10000 years. Humans haven’t managed that for anything, ever.
PixelatedSaturn@lemmy.world 2 months ago
You can’t really guarantee anything. What we do is play the odds. And the odds are pretty good.
kaffiene@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Except you have no emperical basis for judging the accuracy of those odds.
Wooki@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Yes, you can.
It’s been stored in the ground since the earth was formed.
toaster@slrpnk.net 2 months ago
I certainly agree that we’ve gotten much better at safely producing and storing. However, with climate change worsening, we continue to have unprecedented natural disasters in unexpected areas which concerns me the most.
intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 months ago
What kind of climate change disaster do you think would cause problems with nuclear waste storage?
ericjmorey@lemmy.world 2 months ago
harness it,
Getting more efficient and cost effective at a rapid pace. Still some environmental concerns over manufacturing, raw materials acquisition, and disposal of old equipment.
store it,
Getting more efficient and cost effective at a less rapid pace. Still significant environmental concerns over manufacturing, raw materials acquisition, and disposal of old equipment.
then distribute it.
Lots of effort and resources needed for this part. Need to subsidize consumer appliance conversion better.
PixelatedSaturn@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Some countries have sun, some don’t. They might need nuclear. That is the reality.
Evil_incarnate@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Which countries? The UK is famous for its cloudy weather, yet solar is feasible there. Finland and Sweden are building more and more solar. Not sure where you’re talking about.
PixelatedSaturn@lemmy.world 2 months ago
UK has wind.
I’m taking east Europe for instance.
ticho@lemmy.world 2 months ago
FWIW, Baltic countries are going hard for solar, see lemmy.world/post/17098210
Evil_incarnate@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Why does eastern Europe get less sunlight?
The_Terrible_Humbaba@slrpnk.net 2 months ago
Until a weather event blocks out most of the sunlight. An extreme scenario would be what happened to the dinosaurs, however smaller scale versions or that, such as large volcano eruptions, seem entirely possible and could heavily restrict the amount of sunlight you have access to for long periods of time.
Portugal lies in Southern Europe, we get plenty of sun, and we make heavy use of solar, but that still isn’t enough sometimes, and I’m pretty sure we sometimes get our energy from Spain, who themselves use nuclear.
intensely_human@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Darkovia has zero sun
UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Exactly. Building nuclear power plants in the 80s should’ve been the way humanity went. Now, advancements in batteries (Sodium ion for example) and established supply chains means that solar/wind + batteries is the way to go.
I don’t agree with ur safety take on nuclear energy though. All nuclear energy accidents were the result of shitty operational management who were warned waaaay before. It’s like airlines in the 60s, where safety standards were hilariously bad. Now, with extremely stringent regulations, we can solve the safety issues.
Sweetshark@discuss.tchncs.de 2 months ago
Shitty operational management is systemic in organisations that operate huge centralized systems though. see: normal accidents accidents
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_Accidents
UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 2 months ago
I would disagree. Take a look at airplanes for instance. Good safety policy measures and enforcement can make seemingly high risk operations incredibly safe. Take a look at French nuclear reactors for example. Good nuclear safety policies, hence no accidents.
marcos@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Those things that Boeing builds?
downpunxx@fedia.io 2 months ago
shitty operational management will continue to be shitty, because people are people, and as locked down as you try to make nuclear fission, and nuclear waste, there will always be budgetary concerns edging the safety concerns. no terrestrial nuclear, no issue. that's my position and i'm sticking to it.
pedz@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
Just wanna add that storing energy can also be done in other forms than electricity. For example, pump water up a hill with solar energy during daytime, and use turbines and gravity during the night
UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Those forms of energy storage r very location dependent and also quite cost inefficient. Chemical batteries make sense almost everywhere. The only problem is shitty Lithium. Replacing it with sodium ion kinda solves all problems.
kaffiene@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Japan has high safety standards
Omodi@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Nobody died at Fukushima and it was an outdated designed reactor that needed to be retrofitted.
kaffiene@lemmy.world 2 months ago
You stated that all nuclear a accidents were the fault of lax standards. I gave you a counter example.