When did you realize nuclear + wind are the real MVPs

>45% gas
Jesus, that's not much better.
Here in the southern hemisphere UK, over 50% of our energy comes from hydroelectric, but maybe it's not the fairest comparison, since the scale is so much smaller.

Attached: 1410721305946.png (365x470, 209K)

Russia is too poor but China's already working on it.

Are you an idiot? Coal produces carbon dioxide as well as particulates.

but ruskies have a large export nuclear program

>He thinks carbon dioxide is a threat to the environment

Yeah, using the established old tech.

And by "the spectre of the nuclear boogeyman" you mean "the oil lobby"

There is never going to be an energetic revolution until the last drop of petroleum is found and used, trying to go full nuclear would lead to (((accidents))) and renewable sources are still no very good

Nuclear baseload generation
Solar + wind for renewables and Hydro where reasonably applicable.
Gas generation for on-demand surge generation that are fired up as needed

Providing 50-60% of generation with nuclear would be ideal however, that would allow wind and solar to cover another 25-35% easily within the next 10-15 years. Reducing gas/coal generation.

No, the reactor designs are fine, they just need to be subsidised because gas is so cheap.

NIMBYs and hippies are the real thing holding nuclear back.

>anything not coal is "green"
I want to murder anybody that has ever uttered the words "natural gas"

Attached: image.jpg (800x800, 517K)

natural gas

Nuclear could power 100% of the countries energy requirements for the next century with existing waste we have sitting in barrels.

realistically we don't have the infrastructure to manufacture and install that many nuclear plants in any short timeframe.

Just getting most of the developed world switched to nuclear would take ~50 years of MAJOR investments.

>solid uranium fuel requiring rare isotope enrichment and expensive process to produce, which stews into an incestuous goulash of waste that remains dangerous for tens of thousands of years and causes a catastrophic meltdown if it overheats even after it's spent and removed from the core
>vs molten thorium salt that breeds its own fuel from common thorium, can be processed continually to remove byproducts that decay rapidly instead of cycling into a concentrated rando mass of forever death, and even self-regulates its temperature and reactivity simply because of thermal expansion. Also an entire functional plant can be the size of a garage.
The older designs aren't even in the same league.

>Government constantly throwing money at "alternative energy"
>Funding for nuclear R&D and expansion: $0
>Active steps to restrict, limit, and actually decommission nuclear power plants
Yeah okay. We need CLEAN ENERGY. But not nuclear. it's scary. I heard it electrocutes elephants or some shit.

it does come naturally from farts, lel

I have nothing against doing what you're suggesting, but it's not like we can flip a switch and suddenly all go nuclear.

It currently takes 2-3 decades to get a reactor up and running in the US from the design phase to actual activation and power generation.

>gas
BRAAAAP!

>decommission nuclear power plants
They've been doing the exact opposite. A lot of the plants in operation are beyond their useful lifetime and should have been decommissioned years ago. They keep running them because they have to for the energy, even though it is dangerous, ironically because of "safety" concerns that bar the constructions of replacements. Fukushima was exactly one such plant.

This was a good watch on Netflix, it talked about a bunch of the alternative nuclear reactor designs. China has a bunch of the new types being tested while we are stuck with shit solar and wind.

Attached: Screenshot_20190510-004451_Netflix.jpg (1440x2960, 1.43M)

Solar and wind go hand/hand. Solar in the morning. Wind in the evening. Its actually complementary energy source.

The problem is they're not planning to replace them with nuclear.

Gas is trash

It's literally big jet engines and using the turbine to spin a generator

All exhaust gas/heat is wasted

some has steam on the exhaust too but the efficiency is pretty low overall

>nova
based and patrician-pilled

Reminder coal is not as bad for global warming as gas because the ash blocks sunlight.