Why are American people so fucking stupid? Nuclear energy is a good thing. Daily reminder:
>Chernobyl has only had 19 proven related deaths
>Fukushima had a 20 foot wall of water
>solar power releases direct radiation off and has killed more people than nuclear
>windmills kill animals, need backup power and have killed people
>hydroelectric is fucking stupid
>coal.....explains itself with millions of deaths
Explain to me what is bad about gen 5 reactors again, I'm drawing a complete blank....
Americans being mental midgets is not a myth, even brightest of them are nowhere near average european
>>72455787
because of muh nukelar waste
Oh look its this thread again.
>>72455787
FALLOUT IS A PROPHECY DUDE HAHAHA
Blame Big Oil and Big Auto who has funded hippies and created a Green Scare on nuclear power.
>>72455787
>Explain to me what is bad about gen 5 reactors again
Nothing, nuclear is the cleanest, most efficient form of non-renewable energy. However, we should focus our attention on renewables instead.
>>72455994
Let's be honest here, every thread is "this thread again".
>>72455787
>Not accepting fusion energy as your true lord and savior.
>>72455890
you disappoint me
>>72456055
Yeah but this one is particularly autistic
>>72456012
>However, we should focus our attention on renewables instead.
There is no such thing as "renewable energy."
Solar Panels and Wind Turbines require very specific metals in order to be made and function, and those will run out MUCH faster than Uranium
>>72455787
Can we dump our radioactive waste in your mountains, brüdli?
>>72455787
Everything here is good except for your accusation about hydroelectric. Hydroelectric power is great provided you have an excellent river nearby in which to build your single dam. It's usually just not an option.
>>72455787
Nuclear energy is fucking fantastic. But operators are stupid and make fuck-ups, and the companies aren't always willing to dispose of the waste like they should.
Human beings aren't responsible enough to handle nuclear energy. Sad fact but true.
>>72455787
Where do we put the waste ?
Why do you think most green parties are commies?
They were infiltrated by the KGB back in the 60s to sabotage USA industry.
Look how all of their environmental bullshit is always about crippling industries
>nuclear (scary!!!!)
>carbon (muh climate change)
>GMOs (muh feels)
>recycling (their recycling programs are retarded and inefficient, shit that was worth recycling like metal was already being recycled before green shits started)
>solar (its shit)
Not in muh backyard is generally the biggest factor. Not just in putting the plant up but what to do with the waste. We only have so much of rural New Mexico and Nevada to bury it in.
>>72456403
>Human beings aren't responsible enough to handle...
Are you 13 years old or just an authoritarian?
Companies in the USA aren't allowed to dispose of waste properly given Obama's flattening of the Yucca mountain deals. They bury it on-site although there have been no incidents and it has been very safe, spent fuel is just waiting for some ne'er do-wells to sneak in and steal it.
>>72455787
I don't care how good the design is, there isn't a single thing on God's green earth that is fully idiot proof. Nuclear power is lovely when it works, but the risk of radioactive contamination coupled with the heavy infrastructure investment makes nuclear a bad investment. If China gets that thorium reactor up and running we'll revisit nuclear, but it's not workable as is.
>>72456651
We can design a reactor so if something goes wrong, it doesn't fuck everything up.
>>72455787
I'm a huge supporter of nuclear energy but if you're dismissing the exponential growth of children born with birth-defects near the areas of Chernobyl you're not going to be taken seriously.
Chernobyl was a disaster. There's no two ways about it, the entire incident from birth through to today is widely seen as a modern tragedy. What makes it so interesting in the minds of so many is the fact that modern technology of the time and a group of janitor's caused such carnage out of devices that are, in the properly trained hands, perfectly safe.
Nuclear energy is the cleanest, most effective form of non-renewable energy available at the moment and it would be beneficial to all parties involved with we in the U.S.A. began building more power plants to harness it, but don't you for a second dismiss Chernobyl's generational consequences.
What happened to children in that area post-Chernobyl is a crime against our fellow man. Acknowledge the faults of what you support as it strengthens your argument overall.
>>72456448
Switzerland.
>>72456837
Yes, but can you do it cheap enough to compete with other sources of baseload power?
>>72456448
Australia
>>72456651
>>72456837
We already have. Three Mile Island was a horrible meltdown but didn't fuck up everything.
>>72455787
To try and tell the oil barons and green party in Norway, that nuclear or fusion power might be/is a good choice, has the same outcome as publicly announcing that you are Nazi.
Women are afraid of it and see it as evil magic
Solar and wind energy are good magic to them
>>72457042
Nuclear can compete commercially with fossil fuels if that's what you mean, yes. But it does require heavy initial investment which holds it back. Still, I think like 20% of the energy in the US is nuclear which is not bad at all.
>>72457042
>>72457111
We're still operating the plant and the area is still livable. Chernobyl had no containment and operated with very few safeguards. Things are already safe. Fukushima was a fucking tsunami and the meltdown was certainly a concern but not the worse thing happening that month. It's like being concerned that all murderers escaped from the prison when Mt. Vesuvius erupted.
>>72457235
>Nuclear can compete commercially with fossil fuels if that's what you mean
It can't, not anymore. There's fracking, canadian shale, and Russians and Saudi's pumping like hell to regain market dominance. Cheap gas will end the nuclear dream and the renewables.
>>72457443
Forgot image
Also. i watched this the other night.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sG9_OplUK8
>>72457235
It's not competitive without subsidies at the moment. Not that any renewable is other than hydroelectric for that matter.
>>72455787
Until one of ours blows for any reason and 30% of Switzerland becomes uninhabitable for centuries.
Just not worth the risk
>>72456448
The ocean. It's already the globes garbage dump and we're already within 20 years of fishing everything we eat to extinction.
>>72457621
>30%
Based on what other historical event? Are your plants thousands of times larger than the others around the world?
Oh, did that come from out of your ass?
>>72455787
You just failed so hard at backing up your story, come back when your 6th grade brain gains enough intelligence to actually start a conversation on 4chan
>>72457621
That's not how it works.
>>72457504
Actually true. Gas has never been cheaper. The nuclear business is tough right now and for the foreseeable future.
>>72457589
Yeah, nobody wants to put the money down for a nuclear plant.
its not a matter of building them but its the absolutely retarded citizens that appose the construction of nuclear plants because for what ever reason they think its dangerous. Its sad that the uneducated and brain dead town people of America are allowed a voice in matters such as these
>>72455787
Nuclear energy scares women so they vote against it.
>>72455787
There are more Americans in favor of nuclear power than there are people in your entire country.
The only reason we don't have it is the fact that our politicians are bought and paid for by energy lobbies who would lose their monopoly.
Luckily, Trump will fix this and then you're welcome to apologize and leave this board forever.
>>72455890
Can you name a famous alumni from the top Croatian university?
I've not kept myself updated about these things.
Is there a way to possibly reutilize waste?
>>72455890
Americans are responsible for flight, cars, electricity, telephones, and cameras.
Your country is literally only known ad the place where American TV shows shoot, like New Zealand.
Kill yourself
>>72457773
>Based on what other historical event? Are your plants thousands of times larger than the others around the world?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_Exclusion_Zone
>2,600 km2
Switzerland is roughly 40k km2
Roughly 40-60% of Switzerland is generally uninhabitable geography (according to different estimates/measurements) leaving us with about 20k km2 of habitable land.
So I was wrong in that it's not 30%, which was just a number I heard somewhere, but ~10% if we assume similiar scale as chernobyl. Still doesn't seem like a good deal to me.
>>72458716
New breeder reactors plan to reuse waste for power, but nobody but China has put down money for one. We'll have to wait until 2020 to see if the damn thing works, and maybe we'll have fusion then who knows.
>>72456837
Most reactors are already like that. It comes as shock to most people that Fukushima is actually older than Chernobyl, and that they're both 1st generation nuclear reactors. There are a thousand nuclear reactors in France working right now and you don't hear anything about them ever. There are ~2-3 foolproof protection layers on modern nuclear stations that work without even the electricity supply.
>>72456448
Putting some mildly radioactive depleted uranium mixed with glass in a concrete bunker in the middle of the desert is far less risky than burning coal and far cheaper than "green" energy.
>>72458211
As an Irishmen this cartoon is just offensive.
>>72458836
>if we assume similiar scale as chernobyl
Why are you assuming that?
>>72459035
You're asking why I go off a precedent?
>solar power releases direct radiation off and has killed more people than nuclear
Gonna need a source on that, friendo.
>>72458780
Hopefully you have cancer. I hate you for posting that super offensive anti-Irish cartoon.
>>72456356
You ignorant fucking kraut. There's no such thing as nuclear waste, only fuel for different reactor designs
>>72459089
Are your nuclear reactors run as badly as Chernobyl?
>>72459217
badly run*
>>72459217
Is there evidence or logical arguments to be made that our nuclear reactors could not cause a similiar exclusion zone as chernobyl?
Because I'm talking purely risk here, not probability. If there's any risk of it ruining a tenth of our country, it's not a good deal. It's not like we don't have alternatives here.
You can just look at them and tell the difference. White clouds of nuclear energy. As opposed to thick black soot from coal.
>>72458211
I'm still offended. APOLOGIZE
>>72459347
I don't know how the reactors in your country are run. Assuming a failure is going to be similar to Chernobyl is stupid if you don't even know how the plant is designed. Chernobyl didn't even have a containment vessel. Do your reactors lack containment measures?
>>72459565
> Assuming a failure is going to be similar to Chernobyl
Again, I'm not assuming that. I'm assuming that there's a RISK of it being similiar.
Is this an unreasonable assumption to make?
And you know, Chernobyl was generally thought to be failsafe too.
>>72455787
I live five miles from Three Mile Island
>tfw the energy company mails my house evacuation routes
>>72456189
You can make wind turbines out of household electronics and materials
>Nuclear energy safe
Look at all the smoke coming from those chimneys. :^)
>>72459768
Pretty cool. Do you have to test your groundwater for cancer risk?
>>72459693
>Is this an unreasonable assumption to make?
Obviously if you know nothing about how reactors are designed. I don't know how your reactors are designed. Why don't you tell me?
>Chernobyl was generally thought to be failsafe too.
Chernobyl's reactor was poorly designed and run by a crew that wasn't properly trained.
>>72455787
>19 proven related deaths
Wow nice shitpost.
>>72459964
>Chernobyl's reactor was poorly designed and run by a crew that wasn't properly trained.
And at the time, it was thought to be the safe enough. How do you know things like that aren't happening here?
>>72459936
Nah there's no risk with our groundwater or anything. I only drink gallons of water anyway because they're so cheap and it's better than the fucking hard mineral water we get from the Susquehanna River
>>72455787
It's because natural gas is incredibly cheap and some regions just don't need nuclear power.
Many companies right now don't want to invest in anything but natural gas. We've seen a huge decrease in coal and oil plants all because of natural gas.
Some places also just aren't good for nuclear plants. When you have a space 10X the size of Switzerland and uses half the electricity, just throw up a coal plant where needed.
>>72459836
He's talking about rare earth metals like neodymium.
It's hard to get them out of the dirt.
>>72459980
Hopefully you have cancer.
>>72459693
>Chernobyl was generally thought to be failsafe too
Let's be straight to the end, shall we? Station personell manually disabled every failsafe protection to run tests. First time test didn't begin because they wanted to save water to do it again and reactor stopped. Then https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodine_pit
happened. And instead of waiting a couple days as instruction says they started reactor again because they wanted to present test results to Moscow before May holidays. Some enginneers strongly objected to breaking instruction with every protection disabled, and only the authoritarian nature of command chain and a ten different circumstances that came together produced what we have.
>>72459980
ALSO GTFO troll.
>>72460178
>How do you know things like that aren't happening here?
Because we have had accidents occur under other reactor designs that have not caused any sort of catastrophic disaster.
For the 10th time, are you reactors designed like Chernobyl's? My guess is probably not, but I have no idea. I know US plants are not. Why don't you actually look up some information?
>>72460404
>>72460465
Why are we purely talking work accidents anyways?
I did say "for any reason". Remember the terrorists in Belgium that got *this* close to infiltrating a nuclear power plant?
>>72458966
>>72459500
how? It's not exactly scathing, and you childish tantrum is lending credence to it.
>>72460779
It's okay to admit that you were wrong.
>Remember the terrorists in Belgium that got *this* close to infiltrating a nuclear power plant?
Sounds like we should have sensible immigration policies.
>>72455787
>>solar power releases direct radiation off and has killed more people than nuclear
>>windmills kill animals, need backup power and have killed people
those are the worst arguments against solar and wind power i've ever heard, do your research you fucking mountain kike, there are actual drawbacks to wind and solar energy, those things you've cited aren't relevant
>>hydroelectric is fucking stupid
actually it isn't, it's probably better than wind or solar
you don't have to """prove""" that all the other energy sources are shit in order to convince people that nuclear is good
>>72461032
>It's okay to admit that you were wrong.
No, I'm not. I maintain my position that there's a remaining risk of accident, even though I don't know how likely or devastating it would be.
This isn't something either of us can argue without indepth knowledge of operating procedures in nuclear power plants. I just assume there is and you assume there isn't. Occam's razor doesn't really highlight either assumption. Fair enough.
>Sounds like we should have sensible immigration policies.
Or alternatively, sounds like we shouldn't have nuclear power plants around if all it takes is a handful of people who don't mean well.
>>72461331
I'm not assuming anything. There are nuclear accidents that have occurred without any serious harm. One has been cited in this thread.
>we shouldn't have nuclear power plants around if all it takes is a handful of people who don't mean well.
It takes a lot more than that, so I have no idea what you're talking about.
>>72460779
What could they do after infiltration? 2nd and 3rd generation reactors don't allow explosion even if station personell wants to do a meltdown manually. Ragheads can't even stop reactor and take uranium/plutonium rods out without having many insiders who knows how to do this.
>>72458915
This. Something like 70% of the French power is from Nuclear plants and we have no problem with that.
Chernobyl and fukushima were fucking shit. It has nothing to do with current nuclear reactor. It's like saying current houses are shit because there has been cases of lead poisoning in isolation in 50s era building
>>72455787
I'm all for nuclear, but Australians are as stupid as Americans.
We are just tougher than them
>>72455787
Have you gotten your daily radioactive vaccine yet?
>>72455787
>19 related deaths
You do realize that that's the figure the USSR put out
And only accounts for deaths the directly resulted from the explosion
>>72455787
I will bet you money most Americans here support nuclear. The problem is women. "Muh feelings" trump facts for them.
>>72456189
>falling for the uranium jew
molten thorium reactors are the future but all of the road blocks that were put in place for the first and more inefficient & dangerous uranium reactors are halting progress
>>72455787
Because if they solved the green energy dilemma, they wouldn't have jobs anymore.
Everyone i know supports nuclear power. theres a fucking nuclear reactor on my college campus less than a mile from my house. i couldnt possible be less worried about it.
Its the eurofags who are scared of nuclear power.
>>72462430
>but all of the road blocks that were put in place for the first and more inefficient & dangerous uranium
There were no road blocks, burger. Uranium reactors are used because they also supply U-235 for nuclear warheads production. If the greens really understood shit they'd protest not nuclear energy as a whole but specifically some reactors.
>>72455890
You're right they don't cuck themselves nearly as hard as the average eurofag
>MUH SAFETY MUH HAZARDS MUH MELTDOWN
a wise man once said - the bigger the risk, the bigger the reward. step up niggers.
>>72458780
>Car
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Benz
>Electricity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla
(He was Austrian)
>Flight
Yes, they were American.
>Telephones
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Graham_Bell
Scottish
>Cameras
George Eastman, he was american.
Nuclear excrements are a eternal present to future human generations... that's even more degenerate than gov's deficits
LFTRs are the future of nuclear energy and energy as whole.
>Let me call everyone who disagrees with me stupid because they have concerns about the safety of nuclear reactors
sjw-tier discourse
>>72462430
They have the current problem of thorium salts being so reactive they corrode the reactor lining. Once that has been solved, things should pick up hopefully.
>>72464164
Nah, the future is small scale reactors which can be made reletively cheaply and plug into local power grids. Rolls Royce in the UK is currently in talks with the government to provide several small scale reactors at a fraction of the cost (~£1.25 Billion) that the EDF Hinkley reactors would be.
>>72465480
>small scale reactors which can be made reletively cheaply and plug into local power grids
sooooo, LFTRs?
>>72465546
Potentially, if they manage to make a working thorium reactor.
>>72458540
Underrated kek
>>72456886
You claim to be a "huge supporter" yet you use Chernobyl, a soviet gen 1 reactor, as an example of why it's bad?
>>72463923
>Tesla
>Electricity
This meme needs to die.
>>72457111
If three mile island blew I wouldn't be alive. It's a strange feeling.
