>Nuclear energy is bad because of Chernobyl and Fukushima. It's impossible to learn from our mistakes, nuclear power plants must be removed, even though they pollute far less than other energy sources.
>What do you mean all other environment-friendly alternatives are less reliable and more costly to run?
Nuclear energy is bad because of Chernobyl and Fukushima. It's impossible to learn from our mistakes...
Lincoln Carter
James Davis
What's the connection between never having had sex, right wing politics and being such a fan of nuclear energy?
Jayden Cruz
>I care about things enough to know about them
Nicholas Harris
>>What do you mean all other environment-friendly alternatives are less reliable and more costly to run?
You had me until there, the only reason why nuclear powerplants arent beeing spammed everywhere is because they are too costly to make and mantain and most of the time dont even cover the construction costs in all of the shelflife of the power plant
Isaiah Powell
why is it safe/unsafe. how do they make it safe?
have you actually ever seen a wall chart pretty interesting desu?
do you think with all the combined autism we could create better reactors using less fissile material per cycle and or are safer.
here is a wall chart from nuclear engineering for autism.
Adam Gomez
here is a link for more of them
Austin Rivera
Aaron Gomez
*is more liked than the entire alt-right
Nathaniel Long
>Authorities in Italy are investigating a 'Ndrangheta mafia clan accused of trafficking and illegally dumping nuclear waste. According to a whistleblower, a manager of the Italy's state energy research agency Enea paid the clan to get rid of 600 drums of toxic and radioactive waste from Italy, Switzerland, France, Germany, and the US, with Somalia as the destination, where the waste was buried after buying off local politicians. Former employees of Enea are suspected of paying the criminals to take waste off their hands in the 1980s and 1990s. Shipments to Somalia continued into the 1990s, while the 'Ndrangheta clan also blew up shiploads of waste, including radioactive hospital waste, sending them to the sea bed off the Calabrian coast.[99] According to the environmental group Legambiente, former members of the 'Ndrangheta have said that they were paid to sink ships with radioactive material for the last 20 years.[100]
This is a low even for terroni.
Caleb Cox
...
Jaxon White
Enjoy
Christian White
Nuclear waste is a big problem and the dangers of sabotage/terrorism are too big to tolerate. Imagine how screwed smaller countries would be. Luxembourg as a nation would literally no longer exist if the Cattenom power plant blew up.
Joseph Phillips
>Is Swedish
Isaiah Watson
that's not true. Once a powerplant is built it's significantly lower than any alternative. The only costly thing is building them initially and that is usually because they take so fucking long to build. Trust me I did research on this.
Asher Nguyen
If you have nuclear energy plants, you can easing make nuke bombs out of it when in need.
Gavin Wood
the waste is the least of our problems in a nuclear reactor
Asher Garcia
*easily
Austin Stewart
It's not. Especially not the stuff that was already dumped into the wild, e.g. the sea and lakes.
Today, we eat one business card of plastic per week because humans fail to take care of plastic waste. Just imagine a scenario in which we eat minor amounts of radioactive particles on a regular basis.
Sebastian Cooper
>tf
>tp
Austin Ortiz
internet
Ryan Gutierrez
we barely need technology at all
everything is a constant struggle to figure out how to sustain anything now because you people are all wild savages if all of you were good people it would be so much easier
Ethan Green
>We need to stop using coal and fossil fuels
>NOOOOO you can't use nuclear that's not what I meant
Lincoln James
Can someone explain to me why Nuclear Energy is good and how likely or unlikely it is of a melt down occurring that’ll fuck us up the ass
Nolan White
Fukushima is doing good and it's safe to go already, please visit Fukushima and eat the food there :)
Nathaniel Cooper
>this infuriates the incel
Cooper Nguyen
Michael Gutierrez
dear god why the fuck did we ever quit nuclear power? there was no reason. not even a mandate by the voter to do it. merkel did it on her own, yeah the green party was gaining votes but so what? they were not in goverment.
Matthew Morris
>t.
Henry Carter
anyone else find it amusing that the same imbeciles who claim nuclear plants are safer on average simultaneously say that the government is intrinsically incompetent?
>inb4 muh private sector
Not one (1) nuclear plant has ever made a profit. It's utterly unviable without massive government subsidies.
Anthony Ortiz
The advantages and disadvantages are very obvious. Nuclear runs on very little fuel while producing insane amounts of energy. It doesn't produce emissions making it very green. There's enough nuclear fuel to produce energy for the next thousand years.
Downsides are much more complicated and varied. Ranges from the huge cost of investment to political capital to safety risks. Nuclear meltdowns are rare but they do happen.
It's worth pointing out that despite how awful nuclear disaster are, in the end relatively few people actually died in Chernobyl and Fukushima.
John Brooks
>Russia
Not surprised
Gavin Smith
>Luxembourg
>nation
John Johnson
based colgate
Levi Anderson
>Dutch flag
>furiously defends libtard energy
like clockwork
If you don't try to experiement disregarding every safty regulations then you are fine.
>inb4 tsunami
Michael Campbell
>merkel did it on her own
It's very likely a large group of people probably lead by Siemens and such advised her on the topic. Getting rid of nuclear while also going against coal createst very interesting business opportunities. Meanwhile nuclear is a very small industry with only a few players since everything is very strictly regulated.
Cameron Turner
It's not very nice of course to downplay the victims of Chernobyl but regardless for an event we still talk about today, the total estimates of death are pretty low.
>While there is consensus that a total of approximately 30 men died from immediate blast trauma and acute radiation syndrome (ARS) in the seconds to months after the disaster, respectively, with 60 in total in the decades hence, inclusive of later radiation induced cancer,[2][3][4] there is considerable debate concerning the accurate number of projected deaths due to the disaster's long-term health effects, with long-term death estimates ranging from up to 4,000 (per the 2005 and 2006 conclusions of a joint consortium of the United Nations) for the most exposed people of Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia), to 16,000 in total for all those exposed on the entire continent of Europe, with figures as high as 60,000 when including the relatively minor effects around the globe.[5]
Joseph Williams
It's funny when people mention Chernobyl and Fukushima as the be all end all conversation to end nuclear power. Fossil fuels and the like kill way more every year than those 2 disasters even did. Plus Chernobyl was the fault of le ebin soviet technology and Fukushima was a disaster because they decided to place a power plant in a tsunami/earthquake prone area. Some countries shouldn't use nuclear power (like Japan)
I hate the fear mongering towards nuclear power.
Austin Green
Also after the series aired I went through Wikipedia a lot and half the people send on suicide missions are still alive or have died past age 60.
>Plus Chernobyl was the fault of le ebin soviet technology and Fukushima was a disaster because they decided to place a power plant in a tsunami/earthquake prone area. Some countries shouldn't use nuclear power (like Japan)
We will also say this about whatever disaster comes next.
Jacob Lee
>It's worth pointing out that despite how awful nuclear disaster are, in the end relatively few people actually died in Chernobyl and Fukushima.
Few? Are you serious? No one knows how many people died due to early oncology / or were born freaks. Fukushima is still poisoning the Pacific Ocean. The fact that you do not feel the consequences does not mean that "only a few people died."
Isaiah Hall
Sounds good with me as long as the reactors are out of limits of a populated area
Jackson Morales
Except those disasters were rare as fuck already. Nuclear tech was shit when Chernobyl happened and even more shit because the soviets decided to handle it.
Nuclear plants don't have problems when they're in a stable area (ie most of midwest)
Jaxon Moore
>I want the risk of irreparable cell damage and expensive cleanup in costs and human effort, in addition to the unusability of an expansive radius of land around the complex for decades because it's cleaner and cheaper. Think of the air pollution!
Ethan Evans
Even if you took the absolute worst case scenario of death toll from Chernobyl it is a blip compared to greenhouse gas emissions. (i know whataboutism)
>Fukushima is still poisoning the Pacific Ocean.
As opposed to plastic and god knows what else in the pacific?
Jack Cruz
Soviets handled it fine (except for the the initial Hohol response). They just didn't want to bow down to Reagan at height of the little cold war so they kept silent about it.
Bentley Young
The inital response is what I'm talking about and the reason it got to the point it did. It could had gotten way worse and I applaud the soviets for stopping that.
Wyatt Ortiz
Except Fukushima pollutes the ocean in ADDITION to plastic.
Jacob Scott
>Few? Are you serious?
You do realize that when you look at the scale of what a nuclear disaster could be like and when you take Chernobyl as the actual worst case scenario, it's a very mild outcome?
Benjamin James
I'd prefer nuclear to others like solar or wind. Wind turbines make a lot of noise and like solar energy, they are very ugly and can be seen from far away. This is a problem in countries where the country-side is dense populated. At least we have wind, but solar energy makes no sense in this rainy shithole.
Eli Peterson
Yeah no shit? I never said it went away.
Cameron Clark
A friend of my family has been jailed for 100 days now for anti-wind activism
William Cruz
I don't see the point of Nuclear power when it's just a fancy way of boiling water.
Logan Cruz
Hilarious. In this country where you need a permit for a permit for a permit etc. wind turbines are popping up on land and at sea while no one bats an eye except those who get to live near them. But if home owners want to build a wall or dike to fight coastal erosion it's a big no no.
It's cheaper, no?
Nolan Campbell
In the long term yes. Initial cost is the problem.
Jaxon Roberts
>wind turbines are popping up on land and at sea while no one bats an eye except those who get to live near them.
He did just that. They formed an action commitee years ago but despite breaking their own regulations the government gave a green light to the plan and a lot of anonymous locals started to threaten all people and companies involved and place asbestos on the build sites.
After a while they just brought him in based on terrorism charges (no evidence etc required) and keep him for the maximum duration of 130 days or so purely based on him being the figurehead of the public resistance a few years ago.
Adam Young
doubt siemens has anything to do with it. they build equipment for nuclear facilities afterall. remember stuxnet? it tried to sabotage irans nuclear program but fucking up siemens machienes.. its purely political powerplay merkel tried anything to stay in power. whenever a party got stronger she tried to steal their topic.