Solar radiation
>clean
>gives life
>endless
Nuclear energy
>dirty
>unsafe
>scary
>no solution for nuclear waste
Well fuck. I used to support nuclear, but I can't anymore. The government should ban nuclear energy for at least 200 years before technology has improved.
Solar is futuristic as fuck too, the space station runs off it.
wtf i hate clinton now
>>unsafe
Liar.
>>scary
Well, if you're some kind of mining faggot, sure.
>>no solution for nuclear waste
Liar, again.
Solar Radiation
>Made in Chayna
>Faggy
>Useless
Nuclear energy
>Badass
>Gives superpowers
>Glows in the dark
Nuclear wins, runs in the dark.
haha wow you are one smart guy!
Nuclear power is solar power you tard
The sun is essentially a giant never ending nuclear explosion in space , it gives off the same radiation and shit man made nukes do, it's just filtered out by the atmosphere
>never ending
Our education system really is lacking
Spastic bullshit nuclear shill.
>Nuclear energy
>dirty
False.
>unsafe
It's safer than it's ever been. Coal plants kill far, far more people than nuclear every year, but I don't see you bitching about coal. Don't even mention Chernobyl, that was underengineered and constructed with soviet build quality.
>scary
To the stubborn, uneducated layman with the mind of sheep yes.
>no solution for nuclear waste
Storing under a mountain is not enough for you?
He probably means that it seems unending in respect to our comparatively short lives.
>nuclear
>able to supply power to millions efficiently
>solar
>barely able to power a single family despite charging all day
>solar
>clean
motherjones.com
Nigga even MotherJones can't hide how destructive the mining process is. There is no such thing as clean energy.
>endless
you know it lasts only as long as the sun right? and no star burns forever, so it has an end
T H O R I U M
H
O
R
I
U
M
Solar panel production creates more pollution from its byproduct than it's worth. It's not currently viable. Panels need to have a higher energy yield, right now they're too inificient to power a city in an economical manner.
Nuclear power is the key to world peace.
It is the only way we could possibly bring everywhere on earth up to first world levels.
Once world peace is achieved, we can finally look towards other solutions.
We may not be able to safely dispose of the waste now, but that is a small price to pay for the advancement of mankind.
>solar radiation
>radiation
wew
Solar is a net energy loss. sciencedirect.com
Nuclear just isn't that good at making a large amount of electricity. Plus we throw the rods away when they're only 20% used up.
>its scary
kek I see this technical discussion is off to a great start
build nukes or not on shit island, I don't really care.
At some point nuclear energy will advance to the point where not using it becomes so economically noncompetitive that your hand will be forced.
whether that is mass manufactured pebble bed high temperature gas SMRs, or anuetronic proton-boron-11 inertial electrostatic confinement fusion doesn't matter
the energy density of nuclear fuels are so many orders of magnitude better than chemical fuels its inevitable based on physics, the only question is optimal reactor design
>extremely energy dense
>can only recover the energy via heating water
>goodbye most of the energy
That's why it sucks. There's no way to get the energy directly.
solar radiation isn't gonna be so nice when the ozone is gone
this is aussie shitposting? maybe you should lurk more
Nuclear energy is tied for safest energy industry. More people die from coconuts falling on their head a year than from verified nuclear power related deaths.
>To get the energy directly
Wewlad
There's losses in literally every sort of engine imaginable. You know fucking nothing about thermodynamics or electro-mechanical engineering.
Isn't the sun fundamentally just a giant nuclear reactor, though?
>flag
Retarded opinion discarded instead of falling for bait.
Correct
Why don't we just shoot the nuclear waste off into space? Into the sun or jupitor or something
but its also a safe distance away.
WRONG.
Lets burn thousands of tons of fuel to dispose of a few kilos of spent fuel. Sounds like a great plan.
We could build a giant straw from the ground to in space and the vacuum of space will suck up the nuclear waste.
Just gotta be careful to close it off real fast or it will suck out all of our atmosphere.
Heat engines are the biggest losers. You both knew what i meant, you just had no retorts.
>no one mentions thorium
>the future of nuclear energy
>cleaner
>safer
>less expensive
>smaller reactors while providing same or more power
Because it's just a pipe dream.
>Nuclear energy
>scary
>this faggot never heard of thorium
Saged
kys
...
Oh i missed the gypsy.
>nuclear energy
>glows in the dark
>spain physics
Thats why you are an irrelevant country.
They had working reactors in the 70s, but current designs won because you can't make weapons from thorium reactors.
>MUH T-THORIUM!11!!!1!
>MUH WEPUNZ1!!111
>MUH NUKES1!1111
Thoriumfags everyone.
Why is everyone shitting on thorium? What's wrong with it?
Stay cucked with your 70% fissile material "waste" but can't use because muh solid fuel.
It's fucking nothing.
Basically hot air.
Unreachable, unsustainable, unsellable, unusable and unbuildable.
>the flocks of thoriumfags who will try to prove me wrong
Pathetic little cucks, all of them.
>M-MUH WASTE!!11
Fucking armchair nuclear engineers, the lot of you.
Can you explain why? Im genuinely curious.
Just send it up in routine launches who gives a fuck
He can't because he knows he's wrong.
Meant to quote this one.
The existing major industrial and utility commitments to the LWR, HTGR, and LMFBR.
The lack of incentive for industrial investment in supplying fuel cycle services, such as those required for solid fuel reactors.
The overwhelming manufacturing and operating experience with solid fuel reactors in contrast with the very limited involvement with fluid fueled reactors.
The less advanced state of MSBR technology and the lack of demonstrated solutions to the major technical problems associated with the MSBR concept.
You beta cuck Merry belated Christmas
Routine launches into the sun?
And, you can't just add extra payload to a rocket.
Give us your uranium deposits then, you emu cuck.
It's an experiment technology that people circlejerk over like it's the saviour of mankind. It might end up being but for now we have no idea, it needs far more testing and development first
Sounds like it should get more attention and funding instead of solar roadways.
...
Because what you're alluding to, the direct transmutation of mass into useful electric current, doesn't exist. Solar panels are essentially chemical reactions between the two dopants with silicon as the conduit. These things are even less efficient than heat engines, for the most part, and don't last nearly as long.
Current reactors are fission based while the sun is fusion. Completely opposite.
>experimental
>already made working reactors
Vacuum can only draw approx 30 vertical feet.
Turn the straw so that the waste will just flow down
Just put it in a hacked up sub and let students duck with it. Egg heads would get a decent amount of data out of it.
In the scheme of things it is still in the experimental stage, this will continue until mainstream acceptance and implementation of the technology
And that's 30ft of water, not dense-as-fuck solid metal.
No i'm saying that since there is no good way of getting the energy out that the density of nuclear energy is largely moot.
Really stroodled my noodle there thanks
Wow if only they hadn't used solid fuel. Fucking retards.
>sun runs on fission not fusion
>american education
pros of nuclear: can backfire and hopefully wipe out everything, preventing us from experiencing the mulatto onslaught.
There's only a handful of ways of getting useful energy out of heat. So nuclear was always fundamentally limited.
is this a troll thread?
>scary
sounds like a troll thread