Uranium3006 @ Uranium3006 @kbin.social

Posts

1

Comments

1,240

Joined

2 yr. ago

don't let people shame you into supporting evil

don't shame people into voting for shit, fix your bad candidate problem. bad candidates scare off swing voters in the suburbs worse than progressive candidates

they said "hamas apologist" we we know for fact they're an asshole

isn't that film kinda proof that patriarchy doesn't do that all that well?

nonsense regulation combined with some high profile failures from barely modified gen 2 designs being built in countries where there hasn't been a nuclear construction industry for decades so they have to build the infrastructure from scratch each time. it's the wrong approach. the SMR route way is better.

snuffed out by big oil who co-opted anti nuclear weapons protestors to take out their competition

when they complain "they gays are grooming our kids" the part they hate is the "gays" part, not the "grooming our kids" because they want dibs on that and think we want what they want

also since fuel costs aren't really a problem for nuclear power, you can just throw away excess generation. not the best idea but perfectly possible in a pinch

yeah, do a nuclear backup for renewables. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IntegralMoltenSaltReactor this reactor outputs solar salt, which can store energy efficiently for hours and allow load following

china's been building dozens of reactors, all of a common design which is the correct way https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HualongOne

bullshit regulatory costs can increase infinitely without nay change to the underlying engineering or economics. that's 100% the cause of the price increses

big oil pushes this stuff, by the way. because they know the reality that when nuclear plants get shut down, natural gas replaces it

the earthquake didn't even damage the plant, they thought of that. the tsunami knocked out the power lines and bad generator placement led to loss of power for cooling. build reactors to passively cool themselves (which should just be a mandatory safety feature on new reactors tbh, it's not a big ask and improves safety a lot) and fukushima type accidents become impossible. that plant was so old that the original operating license was going to expire a week after the quake and the only guy who died had a heart attack. fukushima-sized death tolls happen in the rooftop solar installation industry every year, totally unreported.

yeah you can do throium, and there are some compelling reasons to, but uranium is fine enough. anti-nuke isn't about actual technical enlargements. the anti nukes hate nuclear fusion too

indeed. also chernobyl and fukushima aren't comparable, really. I'd support a law that all new power reactors need to have passive cooling relying on the laws of physics, not relying on external power, but that's not a high bar and many designs already have it. remember that most currently operating reactors were built all at once in the mid 20th century and even then their safety record has been great. we can do better with new construction

the most dangerous part of nuclear power is not using enough nuclear power

that is a big problem anti-nukes have, don't they?

of course I'm blaming the real problem: relentless attack by the fossil fuel industry

high speed rail and subways have the same problem. it's not inherently expensive, rich people sue and sue until it's too expensive

Those are not at all cheap and are subsidized by enrichment for weapons purposes.

they aren't, and the whole anti nuclear power movement is just people who don't understand science not being able to tell the difference between a bomb and a power plant. I mean science education wasn't that great in midcentury america but today we can easily know better