What's Jow Forums's stance on nuclear (the only energy source of the future)?

Attached: 71594750_493088271525244_5760678860614008832_n.png.jpg (760x427, 37K)

Other urls found in this thread:

Baby Australia making threads. How cute

It's the cleanest source of energy by power unit generated but the russians ruined for all with their chernobyl mess.

Nuclear power is the best type of power. Anyone who talks about climate change, but doesn't support nuclear power should go shove it.

nuclear power is based but we prob won't switch to it until these fucking boomers die off because of "muh chernobyl"

>Small part
It should be the centerpiece. How much more proof do we need that she's just shilling for OPEC and China?

Attached: 1568516875107.jpg (900x4000, 695K)

nuclear is great when it works, a nightmare when it doesn't
maybe pebble bed reactors will be safe to use, but it needs to be proven

someone is going to fuck up somewhere

would you like to eat fish caught near fukushima?

Yes. Do you have any?

absolutely I might get superpowers which would be pretty based

>nuclear is great when it works, a nightmare when it doesn't

I don't get this reasoning. There are hundreds of reactors producing power worldwide across a bunch of countries for decades, and only two had an accident that lead to any sort of significant release.

Should we get rid of airplanes because they are a nightmare when they crash?

nuclear is an excellent source of energy. cleaner than coal or oil.

Please stop.posting this trans.
We are not fooled.

subhuman faggot

Attached: muh nuclear.png (564x825, 53K)

Too much of a risk for shithole countries, but the first world nations can manage it safely, with the notable exception of Japan, of course.

>No harmful health effects were found in 195,345 residents living in the vicinity of the plant who were screened by the end of May 2011. All the 1,080 children tested for thyroid gland exposure showed results within safe limits, according to the report submitted to IAEA in June. By December, government health checks of some 1700 residents who were evacuated from three municipalities showed that two-thirds received an external radiation dose within the normal international limit of 1 mSv/yr, 98% were below 5 mSv/yr, and ten people were exposed to more than 10 mSv. So while the was no major public exposure, let alone deaths from radiation, there were reportedly 761 victims of "disaster-related death", especially old people uprooted from homes and hospital because of forced evacuation and other nuclear-related measures. The psychological trauma of evacuation was a bigger health risk for most than any likely exposure from early return to homes, according to some local authorities.

remember the three-eyed fish at the nuclear power plant on the "Simpsons"?

Energy source we need to be focusing on. Has applications on Earth and in space. By-products can also be used to make nuclear weaponry for when we encounter xenos. But you won't see any of these faux-outraged, climate-hysterical communists admit it; they just want the bourgeoisie (whites) to pay exorbitant taxes and open the borders to the West.

this thorium is the way to go
that not every country has a couple badthoriumreactorboys is the proof all politicians are paid

also are ppl honestly taking the fetalalcoolsyndrome posterchild seriously?
its one thing to have her REE about the problem
but even discussing solutions is laughable even for those who think there is a problem in the first place

Brainlet here. Is thorium a meme or does it actually work?

kek what a faggot

Are there viable alternatives to airplanes? In a good number of nations, nuclear energy provides little to no advantage compared to alternatives - for many other nations, it might be the only sensible thing to do. Just read up on the nightmare that is Hinckley Point C in the UK and tell me that it's a sensible idea. The only way that power plant can be profitable is to fix energy prices for the next 5 decades?

>Too much of a risk for shithole countries

Even your shithole manages to operate a couple of reactors without fucking up

Attached: images (23).jpg (650x433, 57K)

>little to no advantage
by this standards ariplanes provide little to no advantage to zeppelings or boats
so there is your awnser


I wouldn't build a nuclear plant in a place at risk from earthquakes and tsunamis.

Sheer fucking miracle if you ask me. The third power plant has been under construction for something like 3 decades and they say it won't get ready before 2030.

Not that I'm against it, no, but I just don't trust my people with it.

Thorium reactor is certainly possible, but the engineering hasn't been done to completely design one. They are working on it though (multiple different competing designs).

No you want. You will permanently alter your DNA forever dooming yourself, and your offspring to congenital defects. And that is best case scenario.

Nuclear is retarded because we use the crudest form of it.

Greta Hitler will let some use nuclear
how magnanimous

If you're gonna power a whole country with them it's gonna be extremely expensive in terms of upkeep, building and decomissioning of them and the amount of highly trained staff to operate them. It'd have to be 100% nationalized because there's no way in hell I'd EVER trust the private sector to handle fucking nuclear reactors without cutting corners.

What is long term side effects for 1000.

It blows me away how fucking retarded people. If a person doesnt exhibit a side effect within days or weeks it is totally safe. Trust me.

Why is this failed abortion getting attention?

Nah that’s just Soviet engineering at work, nuclear is a great energy source if reactors are made by competent nations/companies.

all fish in japan is radiation free by now alarmist cunt

Ya it has. A working design came out in the 60s. Maybe earlier.

LFTR is a fucking pipe dream, if you know anything about the fuel cycles you know that you'll never get the kind of power everyone talks about.

No it is not you retard. But make unbelievable shit up as you go anyways.

I sleep with Uranium oxide by my head

Not true. You are a faggot and your post is retarded.

>give nuclear plants to niggers

You are so cool. People want to be like you, really smart people.

We will colonize the solar system with fusion reactors.
pleas screencap

Ok, you're technically correct. They've built an experimental reactor in the 60s. What i meant was there hasnt been a commercial generation design completed. Those are different and have different set of challenges.

Is good
Stop climate scare

Solution is obvious - first world countries invest in nuclear power plants in third world countries that are owned and operated by first worlders. Both the US and Russia have been working on an "offshore nuclear" concept for about 10-20 years now - small scale plants (80-100 mW) that can be mounted onto barges or cargo ships and move to regions to generate power on a contract.

They can't into basic maintenance of infrastructure, so it'd be the equivalent of dumping radioactive waste in the water supply. Alternatively the africans would likely sell their fissionable material to isreal-hating nations, so win-win

Everything you see about thorium pretends it's a fissile fuel and not a fertile one. You need a reaction in order to keep it going, sometimes this will decrease the yeild by over 50% for small reactors. This on top of U233 being the main reaction in LFTR, which produces less energy in a molten salt reactor than 235 in traditional ones.

LFTR is worth investing in but it will and can never be a full replacement and magic energy producer like so many people want it to be.

So if the thorium theory is sound why are we still relying on unstable nuclear elements for energy?


Oh now she knows what the IPCC is? Because all of her talk about mass extinctions in her lifetime is not backed by the IPCC in the slightest.

No he's right. What he's not talking about are the fish in the Pacific.

The average person in 2006 got around 6.2 mSv annually just from daily living.
>The median thyroid equivalent dose was estimated to be 4.2 mSv and 3.5 mSv for children and adults respectively. Maximum thyroid equivalent doses for children and adults were 23 mSv and 33 mSv, respectively. This is consistent with health authorities' screening tests on 1149 children under 15 in March 2011.
So at worst, a few got less than 5 times an average annual amount of radiation
You have to get into the hundreds of mSv to start having any effects under the old LTN model, which is pretty much being thrown out since all data points towards a threshold being needed (well above the doses received at Fukushima

projects of the ones coming online now are most likely decades old
id wager future ones will all be th

The Oak Ridge reactor project successfully demonstrated that molten salt reactors were viable, but it didn't successfully demonstrate that you could combine them with an in-situ thorium fuel cycle. You need to make both parts of the concept work in tandem to get the full benefit of a thorium reactor.

Bullshit. Nuclear is the most harmful source of energy for human's health that ever created. Just look at Russia. Grooks use tons of them and many got cancer at a very young age.

I see, its a pity then...
How is Chile doin fren?

Stupid, brainwashing kid

I took part in a VC round for moltex just 2 weeks ago. MSRs are coming.

Nuclear needs to be built en masse, but with a scaled approach, start slowly with a few plants.

MASTER THE BUILD. The cost of constructing new plants of the same design is reduced exponentially as experience is gained by the crews and leaders of those projects. There has been a lot of research into why the cost of building nuclear plants is SO high, and non standardization is a huge reason why. When plants of a same design are built by the same teams, the subsequent builds have always been dramatically cheaper.

There are nuclear reactors literally spread under and on top of every major body of water. How do you think much of the Navy is powered?

plane crashes do not leave areas uninhabitable for centuries

fukushima almost poisoned the pacific by itself, it's not a risk that should be ignored

only 3 years after fukushima, the whale may have no detectable radiation on the outside, but the mother may have damaged genetics from eating radioactive plankton/fish, and they're not the only species affected

what is the full impact of fukushima on fish eggs? we have yet to see because it keeps getting scrubbed off the net
I hear fishing on the west coast of america is not doing very well, very quiet waters, starfishes turning to slime

More magical than Hogwarts

yeah that's what's doing it
'warm water' lmao
not radiation decimating the pacific

who even knows if pacific fish are still spawning

Id like it as much as building a nuclear reactor on a cost prone to tsunamis and placing critical backup equipment in the fucking basement.
OH, and ill make sure to place those fuel rods at the top.


Plant trees.
Nuke refugees.

Get this poster to the infirmary. He is clearly delusional.

Attached: 1565592085994.png (900x676, 410K)

The fact you believe this shows just how little you know about radiation. This article is for a particular audience, one that needs to be tucked in at night.

Natural radiation from the sun and bananas is something organic life has been accustomed to and evolved with. However, we did not evolve to deal with contamination. Especially stuff like plutonium or cs137.

If you bio accumulate just a speck of this shit, you will have a fantastic case of cancer 1-20 years from now. At the very least you will pass on damaged DNA to your kids who will have congenital defects for generations.

Your article is junk science. Take that shit to reddit, faggot.

Right. Let’s give niggers in Africa more world advances. Let’s give them billions-no trillions of dollars worth of companies research and development, countless man hours put in, and heaps of resources it takes to create these massive infrastructures. Let’s give all of this to a continent of people who can’t create a fucking wheel.

Nice rebuttal.

>fukushima almost poisoned the pacific by itself
Fucking retards, water blocks radiation, you can't poison a lake with the fuel of a single plant, let alone an ocean

What is radiation exposure compared to contamination for 1000. Stop comparing the two you fucking retard.

Fuck off to reddit with your transnuclearsafety.

Holy shit it isn't the Jews, it's the Chinese, she's bugling the call to Neo-Colonialism in Africa.

I sincerely hope you aren't implying solar and wind are viable alternatives. They are also highly highly subsidized compared to nuclear. The following is the amount per kilowatt hour for various power types. Nuclear $0.46 - $Coal 1.04 - Solar PV $12.24 - Wind $23.33

china has been colonizing africa for the past 10 years bud, main stream media has been complicit in covering it up.

>Uninhabitable for centuries.

The worse nucular disaster in history was Chernobyl and the surrounding environment is absolutely fine now.

> What's Jow Forums's stance on nuclear
We should, at the very least, be using THORIUM REACTORS. But we won't.
Because we're stuck technologically.
The powers that be profit off the world in JUST the way it is. No need to change it unless they say so.
And that's where we are. That's why besides computing and storage mediums and high def screens we're still technologically in 1980.

It's nucular you pleb.

"By 1954, Weinberg and his team had built a working prototype: a 2.5-megawatt power plant that used a small amount of uranium-235 dissolved in molten salt made of fluorine, sodium, and zirconium."

"It was the first working molten-salt reactor ever built."

Exactly. If we updated the existing nuclear infrastructure and added to it we could be recycling all of our nuclear waste as fuel, multiple times over.

Turn on spell check brainlet

Exaclty. A melt down every 10-20 years should leaves us completely fucked in 200 years. At least the northern hemisphere. The movie wizards might actually come true.

It would be fine if it could be completely retard proofed, but people are only going to get dumber in the future.

what the hell does a 12 year old hermaphrodite know about nuclear power?

what a croc of shit.

I want to see a nuclear plant run by entirely by Somalians

No it is not. Kys.

"By 1954, Weinberg and his team had built a working prototype: a 2.5-megawatt power plant that used a small amount of uranium-235 dissolved in molten salt made of fluorine, sodium, and zirconium."

"It was the first working molten-salt reactor ever built."

Attached: 585aca7cee14b618038b489b-480-473.png (480x473, 248K)


There was also Fukoshima and the Long Island thing. The Chernobyl thing is just more well known cuz of the new show, but in reality, nuclear energy carries the risk of human neglect, which can create disasters that would make the whole global warming debate look like the good old days.

Even if you take the Chernobyl disaster. Imagine a Somalian run nuclear power plant. Things get even scarier when they are near aquifers.

Here's my solution: we're fucked. Deal with the global warming as it comes and focus your energy on: 1. Developing renewable energy; 2. Developing technology to reverse the effects of global warming (Carbon capture technology); 3. Punish companies/countries/groups that stand in the way of 1 and 2; 4. Prepare for disasters and environmental refugees. You guys thought the Syrian refugees were bad?

I do think we should be looking into some implementation of nuclear energy, though. The left can suck my dick for opposing it.

Attached: ManVsNatureChess.png (1441x1077, 2.36M)

The message of that show was that nuclear power plants are run by cretins like Homer Simpson, plant safety officer.
Nuclear power is safe, we pretty much invented it with the bongs, and we can just dump waste from airplanes at night in remote parts of countries we don't like.
Our power bills could be under $50, and that's with cranking the AC to 50 degrees so we can enjoy a preChristmas in August with a roaring fireplace.

>Anyone who talks about climate change, but doesn't support nuclear power should go shove it.

Lol. Yeh we had all that infrastructure here and then they privatised the lot and now we can’t even nuclear power plant ourselves resulting in fucking French and Chinese companies overcharging uk to build reactors hence the 50 year electricity price rip off referred to earlier at Hinckley

>hell I'd EVER trust the private sector to handle fucking nuclear reactors without cutting corners.
Chernobyl was communism. i.e entirely public sector.

It's idiots, like yourself, that are overly cautious sensationalists that will say it's not inhabitable.

It's like the nuclear regulators in general. The maximum limit for exposure in the USA per year is 5000 mrem, all companies don't allow more than 2000. People naturally get a few hundred every year. You know what the level has to be to potentially get a 5% increased chance for cancer? 10,0000 ACUTE exposure.

>why are we still relying on unstable nuclear elements for energy
The industry stopped all progress after chernobyl. Now it's trying to start back up, but the Uranium LWR legacy is overwhelming, since thats the type of reactor with decades of Operating Experience.

is it me or does greta exagerate about climate change

>Natural radiation from the sun and bananas is something organic life has been accustomed to and evolved with. However, we did not evolve to deal with contamination.
You're a fucking retard. Small amounts of fission products are naturally formed as the result of either spontaneous fission of natural uranium, which occurs at a low rate, or as a result of neutrons from radioactive decay or reactions with cosmic ray particles. So yes this stuff has existed throughout our evolutionary history. There was even a naturally occurring nuclear reactor in Africa in the past.