No climate change if world embraced nuclear

Page 1 of 4 [ 59 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 18,965
Location: Australia

24 Oct 2021, 3:29 pm

Quote:
Fmr Extinction Rebellion activist: No climate change if world embraced nuclear energy decades ago

A former UK Extinction Rebellion activist has rejected the idea that renewables are the only way towards emissions reduction and has hit out at “boomer” environmentalists for demonising nuclear energy.

Tyrone Clarke
Digital Reporter


Quote:
Former UK Extinction Rebellion spokeswoman Zion Lights says climate change would not exist if “boomer” environmentalists had not “failed us” and embraced nuclear energy decades ago.

Ms Lights has become a key voice in support of nuclear energy after leaving Extinction Rebellion in 2020, arguing that the group “lost their way”.

Extinction Rebellion has gained infamy across the world since its formation in 2018 with activists gluing themselves to city streets and destroying public property in the name of climate change.

“It's no good just telling people all the time that things are bad and this is a bad thing that's happening, and you should just feel bad,” Ms Lights told Sky News Australia’s Chris Kenny.


https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-ne ... rallPos=15


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet." Humour is not meant to be taken seriously, yet many pervert its intent.
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


I luv KFC!


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 37
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 14,806
Location: I'm right here

24 Oct 2021, 4:43 pm

There's a lot of pretty serious advantages of nuclear energy.
There's a lot of pretty serious disadvantages too.

It'd be nice to have more public discussions and see further developments in the field and with the risks that climate change represent it needs to be understood that the CBA when it comes to fossil fuels vs. nuclear is shifting. That said, the issues of disposing of wastes are still a serious and inadequately resolved issue.


_________________
Be reasonable, demand the impossible.
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 43,258
Location: Houston, Texas

24 Oct 2021, 4:51 pm

Or fusion.


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 18,965
Location: Australia

24 Oct 2021, 4:59 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
There's a lot of pretty serious advantages of nuclear energy.
There's a lot of pretty serious disadvantages too.

It'd be nice to have more public discussions and see further developments in the field and with the risks that climate change represent it needs to be understood that the CBA when it comes to fossil fuels vs. nuclear is shifting. That said, the issues of disposing of wastes are still a serious and inadequately resolved issue.


I find that hard to believe.
But assuming you are correct, is it a greater issue than the catastrophe of "Global Warming"?
I find that hard to believe. 8)


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet." Humour is not meant to be taken seriously, yet many pervert its intent.
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


I luv KFC!


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 37
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 14,806
Location: I'm right here

24 Oct 2021, 5:04 pm

Pepe wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
There's a lot of pretty serious advantages of nuclear energy.
There's a lot of pretty serious disadvantages too.

It'd be nice to have more public discussions and see further developments in the field and with the risks that climate change represent it needs to be understood that the CBA when it comes to fossil fuels vs. nuclear is shifting. That said, the issues of disposing of wastes are still a serious and inadequately resolved issue.


I find that hard to believe.
But assuming you are correct, is it a greater issue than the catastrophe of "Global Warming"?
I find that hard to believe. 8)


I'm not sure if it's a greater issue, like I said, the CBA is shifting in favour of nuclear even with those inherent risks.


_________________
Be reasonable, demand the impossible.
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


DuckHairback
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Jan 2021
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 604
Location: Dorset

24 Oct 2021, 5:42 pm

I find it strange they chose to blame 'boomer environmentalists' for the reluctance to embrace nuclear. It's not as if governments have been listening to environmentalists on any other matter for the last few decades.

Probably more to do with the relative cheapness of constructing coal and gas power stations and their comparative safety.

But yes, nuclear has to be part of the solution now, surely, as the only controllable source of clean power generation. We're out of time for much else.

A breakthrough in fusion would, of course, be the kind of last-minute miracle that you wouldn't believe in fiction.



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,340
Location: Northern California

24 Oct 2021, 6:36 pm

Nuclear proved hard to control. Waste disposal issues and the extensive damage (and death) from even relatively small accidents caused it to fall out of favor.

There really is only one best answer to our energy and climate change issues: need less, use less.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


Axeman
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Aug 2021
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,235
Location: USA

24 Oct 2021, 6:40 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:
Nuclear proved hard to control. Waste disposal issues and the extensive damage (and death) from even relatively small accidents caused it to fall out of favor.

There really is only one best answer to our energy and climate change issues: need less, use less.


Very correct. And although energy generation by fission does not directly produce carbon dioxide, nearly everything else involved in making the reactor run does. Mining the uranium, it's enrichment, transportation, building the facility, waste disposal, etc.



Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 18,965
Location: Australia

24 Oct 2021, 7:18 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
Pepe wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
There's a lot of pretty serious advantages of nuclear energy.
There's a lot of pretty serious disadvantages too.

It'd be nice to have more public discussions and see further developments in the field and with the risks that climate change represent it needs to be understood that the CBA when it comes to fossil fuels vs. nuclear is shifting. That said, the issues of disposing of wastes are still a serious and inadequately resolved issue.


I find that hard to believe.
But assuming you are correct, is it a greater issue than the catastrophe of "Global Warming"?
I find that hard to believe. 8)


I'm not sure if it's a greater issue, like I said, the CBA is shifting in favour of nuclear even with those inherent risks.


What has the Commonwealth Bank of Australia go to do with anything/k? <joke>
Please talk to the left-wing troglodytes, here in Australia. 8)


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet." Humour is not meant to be taken seriously, yet many pervert its intent.
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


I luv KFC!


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 18,965
Location: Australia

24 Oct 2021, 7:26 pm

Axeman wrote:
DW_a_mom wrote:
Nuclear proved hard to control. Waste disposal issues and the extensive damage (and death) from even relatively small accidents caused it to fall out of favor.

There really is only one best answer to our energy and climate change issues: need less, use less.


Very correct. And although energy generation by fission does not directly produce carbon dioxide, nearly everything else involved in making the reactor run does. Mining the uranium, it's enrichment, transportation, building the facility, waste disposal, etc.


Thankfully, renewable energy-producing units don't. <irony> :mrgreen:

Breeders need to stop breeding.
Simples. 8)


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet." Humour is not meant to be taken seriously, yet many pervert its intent.
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


I luv KFC!


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 32,879
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

24 Oct 2021, 8:15 pm

Perhaps a mix of nuclear and renewables.

I think the important thing is to end the oil dependence.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 23,677

24 Oct 2021, 8:24 pm

Environmental groups are ideologically opposed to nuclear energy because of the risk of environmental pollution and damage to the environment caused by incidents like 3 Mile island, Chernobyl and more recently the Fukashima accident in Japan.

In the past there's sufficient avenues for renewables to go down the path of nuclear. but now the urgency surrounding global warming and the lack of/pace of investment in renewables means if we want to get rid of coal powered stations more quickly then we may not have a choice.

It's a great pity that all the trillions invested in nuclear warheads could have been put into generating alternative power energy research.



CarlM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Oct 2019
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 641
Location: Long Island, NY

24 Oct 2021, 8:27 pm

I am a boomer environmentalist and have never been against nuclear. I had a chemistry prof. in college who reinforced my viewpoint by railing against coal vs. nuclear.


_________________
ND: 123/200, NT: 93/200, Aspie/NT results, AQ: 34
-------------------------------------------------------------
Fight Climate Change Now - Think Globally, Act locally.


DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,340
Location: Northern California

24 Oct 2021, 8:29 pm

My children’s generation is fully embracing the “need less, use less” mantra. Nothing else fully adds up, and they know it. Resale clothing instead of new, bikes instead of cars, etc. It’s my spoiled generation that doesn’t know how to do it, and the relentless need to grow economies. We simply can’t do it anymore; countries have to find a new formula for economic success.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


QuantumChemist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Oct 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,580
Location: Midwest

25 Oct 2021, 12:10 am

For nuclear to work properly as it should, it would have to be combined with other power generation technology to get the maximum output. That is very expensive to do at this stage. We would have to basically rebuild every nuclear plant that is still functioning. The amount of red tape involved to do that is immeasurable. Not an easy fix.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 23,677

25 Oct 2021, 12:37 am

Not just expensive, even if there is approval, the planning will take 5 years and then it takes between 7-10 years to build a properly functioning nuclear power plant.

Assuming there is a move to push for building replace coal with nuclear the time frame would be;
2021 - 2026 - advocacy
2026 - 2031 - planning/site approvals
2031 - 2041 - building

I'm afraid by the time there is any carbon sequestering after 2040 by the closure of coal fired power stations it will be too late.
https://www.ft.com/content/9a11b08c-4fb ... 853745bfce