Win / KotakuInAction2
KotakuInAction2
Sign In
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Reason: None provided.

Except that Nuclear actually is the greenest energy we have. The impact from solar and wind is far greater than most realise. Solar requires ridiculous amounts of mining for all the silicon needed in solar panels and to be replaced every few years, and wind turbine blades cannot be recycled and need to be changed out every 5 or so years IIRC.

By contrast, thorium salt reactors cannot go into meltdown (because by design the operation is already in "meltdown"), there is enough thorium on Earth that if we switched solely to thorium salt reactors it would last hundreds of generations (even accounting for population growth) and thorium is pretty abundant in space as well. On top of that, old reactor designs were highly inefficient. For one, uranium was used because it provided by-products that could be used for making weapons. But secondly, it only burned about 30% of the material before it needed to be thrown away and stored underground. However, there are modern reactor designs that can burn ~80% of the material making it far more efficient, AND there are waste burners that can use the vast majority of that remaining 20% (as well as the old stuff that's been stored underground and elsewhere, which would mean that efforts could be made to get rid of/heavily reduce already stored waste and clean up those areas for environmental rehabilitation).

On top of this, any nuclear emissions are just steam, as water is what is heated to turn the turbines in a reactor. In fact, coal burning actually produces more radioactive emissions per kW than nuclear due to imperfect burning.

And lastly, on top of all of that, Nuclear Energy is also the safest. Including tragedies, there are significantly less deaths per kW produced than any other power generation due to the dangers of material collection and worksite safety.

There is a reason that both coal/oil/gas and "green" energy suppliers lobby against nuclear, because it's a major threat to them.

1 year ago
6 score
Reason: Original

Except that Nuclear actually is the greenest energy we have. The impact from solar and wind is far greater than most realise. Solar requires ridiculous amounts of mining for all the silicon needed in solar panels and to be replaced every few years, and wind turbine blades cannot be recycled and need to be changed out every 5 or so years IIRC.

By contrast, thorium salt reactors cannot go into meltdown (because by design the operation is already in "meltdown"), there is enough thorium on Earth that if we switched solely to thorium salt reactors it would last hundreds of generations (even accounting for population growth) and thorium is pretty abundant in space as well. On top of that, old reactor designs were highly inefficient. For one, uranium was used because it provided by-products that could be used for making weapons. But secondly, it only burned about 30% of the material before it needed to be thrown away and stored underground. However, there are modern reactor designs that can burn ~80% of the material making it far more efficient, AND there are waste burners that can use the vast majority of that remaining 20%.

On top of this, any nuclear emissions are just steam, as water is what is heated to turn the turbines in a reactor. In fact, coal burning actually produces more radioactive emissions per kW than nuclear due to imperfect burning.

And lastly, on top of all of that, Nuclear Energy is also the safest. Including tragedies, there are significantly less deaths per kW produced than any other power generation due to the dangers of material collection and worksite safety.

There is a reason that both coal/oil/gas and "green" energy suppliers lobby against nuclear, because it's a major threat to them.

1 year ago
1 score