World News

Nuclear energy is a terrible idea in both a physically (climate change) and socially destabilizing world.

Even Gen4 proliferation-resistant reactors still represent a lethal threat in the event of a release of fissionable materials into the local environment. Building a nuclear reactor without a cast-iron guarantee that there will be a supply of engineering staff, components, materials and clear strong regulation to keep it running safely is a surefire path to disaster.

Whilst the technology and physics behind it are well understood, we have shown time and again in a few short decades of utilizing this technology that we lack the responsibility in our administrative structures to properly manage the risks.

It would take just one full-on reactor meltdown or disaster to poison an entire continent. We have consistently demonstrated that we cannot responsibly assume that risk, which is why there is opposition to nuclear power.

If you want to avoid bad things from happening, do not deploy a dangerous technology and instead focus on what we can do. Renewables are more than capable of providing for our energy needs, and the big kicker here is that they can do so without putting the literal power "off" switch in the hands of the grid or plant operator.

do not let "perfect" be the enemy of "good enough"

edit: quick addendum, I really cannot stress this enough, everyone who says nuclear is an imperfect solution and just kicks the can down the road -- yes, it does, it kicks it a couple thousand years away as opposed to within the next hundred years. We can use all that time to perfect solar and wind, but unless we get really lucky and get everyone on board with solar and wind right now, the next best thing we can hope for is more time.

Good!

Anti-nuclear is like anti-GMO and anti-vax: pure ignorance, and fear of that which they don't understand.

Nuclear power is the ONLY form of clean energy that can be scaled up in time to save us from the worst of climate change.

We've had the cure for climate change all along, but fear that we'd do another Chernobyl has scared us away from it.

Normally I'm not a "lesser of two evils" type, but nuclear is such an immensely lesser evil compared to coal and oil that it's insane people are still against it.

Why go nuclear when renewable is so much cheaper, safer, future proof and less centralised?

Don't get me wrong. Nuclear is better than coal and gas but it will not safe our way of life.

Just like the electric car is here to preserve the car industry not the planet, nuclear energy is still here to preserve the big energy players, not our environment.

I don't think we should shutter existing nuclear plants, but renewables are a better idea than new nuclear plants

As a bit of a "young climate activist" myself (certainly more of a jaded, realistic one) , nuclear is still a bad idea. We don't need a overabundance of electricity, we need more sustainable energy. The last thing we should be doing as environmentalists is giving governments and capitalists more resources to weaponize- ntm more opportunities to critically fuck up our planet. Yes, nuclear energy CAN be produced totally safely. However, from a logistics standpoint this depends on keeping a number of factors in check and one has to account for the materials involved. Storage of nuclear waste is already a problem on planet earth. The U.S has bunkers full of this sludge that will kill anyone who gets close- Not to mention how unethical industry practices are when it comes to mining on a world wide scale!

For the love of everything, at least let's stop decommissioning serviceable nuclear plants.

I wonder what Greta's take on nuclear is.

I live less than 2 miles from the last remaining coal power station in England.

I would much rather have nuclear instead of a chimney chucking god knows what into the air (and subsequently into me) for my entire life.

This thread: nuclear is far better than fossil fuels

Everyone else: nuclear is not as good as renewables

This thread: nuclear is far better than fossil fuels

Crickets

Don't get scared off by the N Word

Nuclear isn't the monster it's made out to be by oil and coal propagands.

I find it fascinating how few people remember the time when Greenpeace was literally selling Russian gas.

holy crap a voice of reason, hopefully they listen. And hopefully she's free to come scream at the climate activists here in the US too.

I always feel like I'm taking fucking crazy pill when we talk about nuclear energy.

Are we forgetting Chernoble, 3 mile island, or even more recenlty fukishima?

Sure, nuclear energy is great, cheap and reliable.. but IF something goes catastrophically wrong, like I dunno.. earth quakes, hurricanes, tornados, floods, etc (IE things we can't really plan for) you run the risk of not being able to fix it easily...

I guess I"m not a huge fan of making large swaths of the earth uninhabital if shit goes sideways.

Nuclear, the costliest energy source available with massive room for long build projects and years of service contracts to manage the waste materials and deconstruction costs with at least nine figures. Cui bono?

Wind and solar ia cheap and save, batteries work. Build time is manageable.

100% right.

It doesn't make any sense without reprocessing though, have to do both. Fortunately France and Finland have active programs.

The US needs to both learn how to do reprocessing again and build more plants.