ITT: Nuclear power discussion

ITT: Nuclear power discussion.

Your fear is the only thing stopping us from pumping out gigawatt hour upon gigawatt hour of the cleanest, safest, and most reliable electricity the world has ever seen.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=49WV3DH_tHs
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium-based_nuclear_power
blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2015/01/16/thorium-future-nuclear-energy/#.V9oByTXkqTI
youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY
nautil.us/blog/no-one-knows-what-to-do-with-fukushimas-endless-tanks-of-radioactive-water
m.youtube.com/watch?v=qlTA3rnpgzU
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Actually we need cold fusion for that.

Nuclear power is the only energy source worth investing in. This solar bullshit is a pipedream

Well that's a fantasy, so don't hold your breath.

It is a well justified fear. Take a look around these boards and it is easy to see that people posses evil in them as well as good. There is someone out there that would use nuclear material for the worst. And nuclear contains such immense power all it takes is one evil act to ruin a lot of things. Nuclear power is just too dangerous given how human nature is.

exactly, solar and wind take up way too much area for the power they make. How can people justify destroying thousands of acres for "clean" energy?
Not to mention how fucking inefficient solar is.

why not use thorium instead of uranium
cheaper, cleaner, safer

Until they achieve fusion, nuclear can fuck off

thorium is impossible to extract energy from retard

how do you mitigate against things like earthquakes and tsunamis?

how fucking stupid are you
where did you hear that

Fukushima you fucking moron.

Plus, there aren't enough transuranics on the planet to power the world for a century, even with secondary burns and even if we could extract the majority of the U235 we know about... which is in the oceans.

>what is MAD

autism
youtube.com/watch?v=49WV3DH_tHs

you don't build them on a fault line, like the derpanese

Best starting place would be away from japan and California

He doesn't know but I'll answer for him. Mutually Assured Destruction. It totally nullifies that retards logic

ur stupid for thinking thorium is better than uranium gayboy

Sounds legit.

Health Physicist here. Most ppl still have no fucking clue about Fukushima, its causes, or its impacts, but FUCK there are a lot of ignorant bastards with strong opinions about it.

>Safest

Jesus people come on.

Energy-production grade fuel is not the same as weapons grade fuel. Fuel produced for energy is ~3% and weapons grade is >10% I believe. Thus cannot be used for development of nuclear weapons. Plus the plants are guarded by PMC's anyway.

>goddamn neo-liberal fag

OP's asshole could be used for converting friction into raw energy.

wanna explain why or are you just gonna call anyone that doesn't agree with you gayboy

>health physicist
Oncologist here. Nuclear energy is what will help us get off this rock

Thorium reactors are much safer, cheaper, and don't produce tons of waste

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium-based_nuclear_power

blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2015/01/16/thorium-future-nuclear-energy/#.V9oByTXkqTI

youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY

Absolute honesty, trustworthiness, and reliability in nuclear power plant trainining, operations, and maintenance.

I am a newfag your idiot. Post like a civilized human being and I might understand what you are trying to say faggot.

Then there's the problem with how expensive renewables are right now
The US has 15 reactors on the most active fault line in the contiguous United States. If an earthquake reaches a 7.7 there, then three cities would pretty much be gone, 300 million dollars of expenses, and millions of people displaced. Also, one of those cities has 9 Fortune 500 companies and a Federal Reserve Bank: St. Louis. We have built nuclear power plants that can withstand earthquakes

These fears are unfounded to date. To build a reactor, obtain the correct fuel at the proper enrichment, then re-purpose those isotopes for use in a bomb...it takes more than one evil person to exact such a plan. That would be a government sized effort, and no country is going to enact such a plan successfully without every other country knowing about it.


Why do you say that?

Wrong. Retard.

The same way we do for any other larrge building in regions threatened by natural disasters. We take proper precautions in the location, the build quality, and we put safety measures in place. We do our best to mitigate risks, and to date we've done well as a species.

We've had clean coal for years, if any emissions come out then bells and alarms go off. Obama shutting down coal plants yet giving General Electric ones waivers to continue operation. Fucking fascism.

Independent backup systems stored above ground in hardened seismically insulated facilities on site. That's what they've implemented since then.

Also, the improvements were 6 months from completion at Fukushima. Sites closer to the epicenter were fine because they had redundant independent power sources above grade.

What about salt reactors?

My understanding is that those kinds of accidents would be impossible?

I think more than fear its a lack of understanding of how nuclear power stations work because in general when people hear nuclear they think bomb despite the fact they function and utilize nuclear material in completely different ways

have you seen china and there air quality?
coal isn't a very good choice

If the scientist/engineer fags could figure out thorium fission we wouldn't have to worry about energy for about 2000 years.

>Your fear is the only thing stopping us from pumping out gigawatt hour upon gigawatt hour of the cleanest, safest, and most reliable electricity the world has ever seen.
That kind of thinking should get you exiled.

It's neither the cleanest, the safest nor the most reliable, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't use it. If you weigh the potential harm against the benefits, any reasonable person should be pro-nuclear. And by reasonable person, I mean someone who believes in global warming, isn't paranoid and is capable of understanding the difference between nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons.

Weapons grade is >90%, and requires far more advanced and intensive enrichment methods. There are some research and military reactors that run 90% fuel, but most power reactors are 3-5%, with some as high as 20%. 20% is about as high as you can get without advanced enrichment methods.

What about fukushima? It happened. It sucked. We're cleaning it up. No one died from exposure.

And...uh...yes, there absolutely are. We have metric fucktons of uranium as do other countries, and even more thorium

Don't be naive. Look at some numbers. Compare the deaths per kwhr. Compare total deaths. Compare rates of pollution. I'll give you a hint. Nuclear wins every comparison.

One more point to make:

Who has the best record of using Nuclear Power? The United States Navy.

Their reactors are built by General Electric's Electric Boat Division

Contract GE to build the reactors, float the reactor in a sizable man-made lake, get navy veterans to run them.

Problem solved

Thorium reactors are nuclear reactors dipshit.

Yeah, from what I've read, they are pretty stable. Granted, only in the past couple of months I've been really interested in nuclear power. I'd ask a chemist or nuclear physicist if you want to know more.

thorium powered plants would be alot better nigga

Desperately building an underground ice wall to prevent tainted ground water from going into the ocean doesn't seem like a successful cleanup to me.

Okay powerschool fag.

I don't think you know the definition of energy.

No love for wind power?

>wind turbine explodes
Oh well, send 10 guys out with a crane next week to build 3 more.

>nuclear power plant explodes
HOLY FUCKBALLS!!! Massive amounts of land are now uninhabitable for decades and useless for farming for centuries! Send in the military to clean it! Each person can only work for 3 minutes at a time and they'll all get radiation burns anyway! Better warn other countries a 1000 miles away so that they can kill off all of their animals and dye them blue!!

>nuclear energy
>cleanest
Pick one.

>inb4 they're well managed, safety shit, blah blah
It has happened before. It will happen again.

It's only cheap when the government pays for it.

Coal not renewable. And we have cleanER coal. It's not emissions free and nuclear still beats it.

This is basically correct.

Source: I work in the nuclear power industry

In theory, they take care of all manner of issues. The tech was abandoned in the 60s because of a lot of metallurgical and engineering issues, but we've advanced technologically to the point where it's worth revisiting.

how long can you keep building tanks to hold the radioactive water?

>Wants manners and respect.
backthewayyoucame.jpg

Denonstrating moral courage to accept responsibility for one's actions.

Besides, thanks to fraking natural gas is a lot cheaper. And that shit is cleaner anyway.

But they are NOT as risky or dangerous as a Uranium reactor, as safe as those are in actuality.

Thorium is just better in nearly every way, and the output material is useless as a weapon.

Every ten years till the world goes bankrupt or dies?

>OP in charge of knowing why nuclear isn't built
It's the cost, retard. That's why they're only currently being built by integrated utilities with guaranteed rate of return policies in southern states.

I guess I'll give my two cents. I'm no specialist, but I have taken a tour of our local power plant a few times as a kid. I belive it to be the cleanest most efficient means of power. The waste is pretty nomonal, they're not really That dangerous. We've had like three meltdowns in human history. I think as long as we're responsible as the human race it will be what substains us until a better source arrises.

Well yes, it all ties together. If the nuclear power industry were better at disseminating information and educating the public, then there would be much less fear and blind opposition. Knowledge pulls back the veil of fear.

It is figured out for the most part. If we could get more funding for research and development and cut back on some of the bullshit red tape in pplace, we could have a thoruim reactor running in 10 years i'm sure.

MITs working on bringing up a new fusion reactor design which should easily break the power budget issue; I.e., it produces more power than it uses.

It absolutely is all of those things. But as long as you're pro nuke I'm happy

nautil.us/blog/no-one-knows-what-to-do-with-fukushimas-endless-tanks-of-radioactive-water

TEPCO has been filling fields with vast arrays of storage tanks to cope with the accumulating water. The company’s 40-year plan for decommissioning the plant calls for the construction of an underground “ice wall” to freeze the soil around the reactor buildings and divert rainwater, and for plugging the leaks in the buildings. But TEPCO has run into problems with the ice wall—the underground tunnels carrying coolant haven’t gotten cold enough to sufficiently freeze the surrounding ground—and the more long-term solution of plugging the reactor buildings’ leaks is still a distant goal. In the meantime, TEPCO keeps building tanks.

There is a HUGE windfarm just north of West Lafayette IN. Probably hundreds of them standing in fields of corn and soy beans.

And the wind almost always blows there. Flat for miles and miles. The only problem is they can't build anything else there because those big turbines have huge exclusion zones around them.

Build as many of them as you want, but there will always be days when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow. So you gotta have something else on standby

Or just get us to run the land based reactors. No more boats or water please.

>And by reasonable person, I mean someone who believes in global warming, isn't paranoid and is capable of understanding the difference between nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons.

So pretty much no one then.

Wind power
>Fucking expensive as shit
>certain climate
>takes up space
>barely powerful
Nuclear Energy
>inexpensive
>over 50 years of use, only 8 people have died: 3 of those were from actual production
>3 mile island had no deaths
>efficient
>nuclear power plants don't explode, it's not a fucking atomic bomb

Also correct. With an administration more willing to support nuclear, the base rates would be guaranteed for the utilities, much like how wind and solar are being subsidized.

Moreover, the cheap cost of (high-greenhouse) natural gas is a huge distraction from building nuclear, which is (rightly, to a point) regulated so much that it is no longer affordable.

OP what do you think about:

1. rogue countries getting leaked material plans.

2. countries being asked to pay unfair subsidies for new plants (aka hinkley point c).

3. The monopoly of westinghouse and Areva.

4. The poor quality of uranium mining in poor countries.

5. small reactors that save space such as SMR and floating power plants on submarines.

6. what is your nationality?

Well if you are gonna run a fission reactor, having it out on a lake adds a safety factor. Lakes are all but earthquake proof, and if the reactor goes bad you can scuttle it.

Nobody realizes solar energy could be harnessed using solar roadways. CLEAN, EFFECIENT, and no clear cutting to create them. They'll also pay for themselves in time, just a large initial cost.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=qlTA3rnpgzU

No but poor maintenance allows for a damaged reactor to leak an astonishing amount of radiation as seen in Chernobyl and japan.

Problem is that Navy reactors are ludicrously expensive, because they're built with ridiculously high quality materials, use weapons grade fuel, and are designed to be absolutely reliable, strongly intrinsically safe, absolutely leak proof, and be able to be run safely by bitter, angry, alcoholic 20 year olds.

>only 8 people have died
>3 mile island had no deaths

Actually we don't, we just need to get better at hot fusion than we currently are, which is slowly but surely happening in labs as we speak

>>nuclear power plants don't explode, it's not a fucking atomic bomb

serious question,why doesn't america do the same as russia and turn them into floating power plants?

Stupid nigger. Go die back to Africa.

Probably because you don't understand the tech. It's actually a pretty solid solution.

>ppl

Opinion discarded.
Go die in a hole, nigger-jew lover.

>can't build anything else there because those big turbines
>hundreds of them standing in fields of corn and soy beans
>fields of corn and soy beans
You what?

>only 8 people have died
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh, one second...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>Your fear
Assuming you think this board is filled with Wall Street tycoons. Nuclear power is a money blackhole unrivaled by any other kind of investment. Not a single plant has turned profit for even a second.

Really they should be dumping into the ocean.
Dilution is the solution.

he probably means as a direct result of the actual violent catastrophes, those figures are definitely misleading due to not accounting for deaths due to radioactive fallout; however in a fusion powered reactor, the product of the reaction is perfectly stable and not at all radioactive meaning that all you would have to worry about would be the direct explosion from an accident making those numbers much more relevant.

That was an explosion of a flammable gas, which could happen to your backyard grill if it was set on fire. It was not a nuclear bomb / chain reaction.

Are you trolling?

Not a single Fukushima cleanup worker has received a large enough dose to cause a statistically significant increase in their lifetime risk of developing cancer.

Yeah, the 5 who died, died during construction of a nuclear power plant. No one was affected from the radiation. You do know that there are more nuclear reactors in the US than just one, right?
>Chernobyl
Fucking socialists
>Japan
Yeah, GE really fucked that up. Jack Welch knew about it and didn't give two shits. Fuck him.

What is your point? Fukushima didn't explode like an atomic bomb.
Are you sure you passed 8th grade?
Fukushima was the result of oversight concerning the safety systems which should have been in place, coupled with the entire of Japan being built on a fault line.

Stop posting memes, greentexting and use your words, you inbred mongoloid nigger-jew lover shill sheep shitfuck.

wat

"Until the ice wall sets" is a pretty reasonable timeline.

Honestly, are the people in your countrys retarted or what if they cant tell the difference between the bomb and a nuclear power plant? wEhere iam from people are concerned about the waste it produces , that radiates for millions of years and nobody can build/ plan a storage that is save for such a time period. and if you just put that shit into an old mine or into the mountains you might aswell instantly poison your drinking water by yourself , cause then you dont get cancer and die fast, atleast.
Well fusion might be the way to go , althougv it will still take decades , german is quite advanced in tearms of fusion research...

>nuclear power plants don't explode
>
>That was an explosion

In a different light, we can hold casks full of spent fuel and irradiated material easy. Barely takes any space.

AHAHAHAHHAHAHA do y'all even split atoms

"don't explode like an atmoic bomb"

It didnt. Thats a fucking hydrogen explosion.

Ex navy nukes already run all the LA d based reactors. Seriously, most of those guys are ex nukes. Rate is irrelevant. ET, EM, MM, hell, there are even ex nuke ICs, from when that was a thing.

It absolutely is not the cost. Yes, it's a large investment up front, but it's not prohibitive and they make money in the long run.

These things are not being build because of unpopular public opinion. That's why every country on earth that is nuclearly capable started shifting away from nuclear after fukushima. People are scared of this stuff because they don't know about it.

People aren't going to rallies and protests outside of nuclear construction sites and yelling about how prohibitively expensive it is.

I'm not anti-nuclear, but when people tell bold face lies like this, it makes me want to be.

Thousands of people died prematurely due to radiation released during the 3 miles island disaster.

Stop posting memes you piece of shit. There exist no respectable people who value your opinion, and that's all it is, uninformed, jew-shill influenced opinion. You will never be worth anything and you are surplus produced by a past age of prosperity. You will never contribute anything and you will live and die without the Earth realizing you are even there.

SOLAR ROADWAYS ARE THE ANSWER!!!!!!!!&)((:&;5):)$&!4)&64):&(