Your country:

innovation in reactor design and safety can eliminate that possibility, and have

we should invest it in instead of wasting our money on millions of windmills destroying our landscape

Okay. As long as the plants are not Russian made.

Not really with Gas turbines if they aren't CHPs.

1. Flag
2. We should burn more oil and gas, "green energy" is Jewish fascist communist Islam

>fusion generator
inshah allah

It's great

But I want nuclear fusion to replace it in the future

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_buildings

Attached: 1436183240379.png (800x750, 57K)

Then why do you allow Russia to build them in your country?

fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanhikivi_1_-ydinvoimalan_rakennushanke

>a nuke reactor being second costliest building

was it a case of gross mismanagement and private industry corruption?

even in my shithole it doesn't result in such overblown costs.

like all else, probably excessive regulatory hurdles

The project was started in 2005 and it was supposed to be finished in 2009. Now it's estimated to be finished in 2019

Attached: 1528840137296.jpg (1111x597, 145K)

I used to think they had some sort of awesome reactor where the radiation was converted into energy.
I was so fucking disappointed that it's just a fancy boiler.

and then you learned the types of energy that exist in our physical world, and you realized that the process of conversion requires thermal to mechanical transference

>Preliminary design work for a larger Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) began in 1985, expenditures on the reactor began in 1987/88 and construction began in 2004 ‒ but the reactor still hasn’t started up. Construction has taken more than twice the expected period. In July 2016, the Indian government announced yet another delay, and there is scepticism that the scheduled start-up in March 2017 will be realised. The PFBR’s cost estimate has gone up by 62%.

but it's still not as costly as yours.

Learning things makes them less fun desu.

I want to be 10 years old again.

Nuclear power is safe but any accident will be costly. Alternative energy is maturing + battery tech + efficient machines/industries will cover our electricity needs in the near future. Geothermal power is also underutilised.

Objectively the safest and greenest form of energy production.

Attached: nuuskamuikkunen.gif (499x374, 968K)

More than leaks and disasters, waste and decommissioning are always going to be major problems with nuclear power plants. With most other plants, demolishing them is a relatively simple task; nuclear power plants on the other hand, have to be painstakingly taken apart once worn out.

Enrico Fermi said his invention was the best form of energy, shitalians hate it thanks to Chernobyl

Nowadays nuclear technology is bullshit. Also western hype of solar panel eletricity and water-wave generators more stupid bullshit. Electro-cars with little finger-size battery more and more stupid bullshit. But i don't know what to do for better life and consider need WW3. In this case everyone would ride on horses with vodka and police nothig say you about it.

It's Neat tbqh

You can also watch coefficient of efficiency. Horses are better.

Okay. As long as the plants are not French made.

wat?

Attached: mullet man.jpg (581x580, 92K)

nuclear power plants are good when your country isnt close to any fault lines and not at risk of earthquakes, like australia.

>Nuclear power is safe but any accident will be costly.
There's literally 10 times less man death in nuke power than solar power.

>Horses are better.
humans are even better.

Ugly AND expensive? I didn't think I could dislike this atrocity more intensely. Why did Muslims allow this pile of dung to tar the view around their holy site?

Nuclear is best for cold countries. Warm countries should use solar.

Nuclear research must keep going because Antimatter reactors are what humanity will need in order to conquer the entire universe.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter

Antimatter is the science fiction fantasy you were thinking about.

in anti-matter power generation as well, you'll eventually be boiling water, desu.

Exactly.

Oil and the gas cause war on the earth and break the power balance.
Should lower the influence.

>Your personal stance in regard to Nuclear Power and Energy:
Cheap electricity, and is highly needed to build advanced industries that are energy hungry. An underground nuclear power plant seems better to lessen possible risks and disasters.

We missed the boat and spent the 20th century clogging our skies and our lungs with pollution from coal fired plants
A paradox, considering how much uranium we have
But I agree with the greenies that we should be building more solar farms and windmills instead of fucking around with new nuclear plant. It's just too much effort for too delayed a reward.

satan

I think its brilliantly simple

Nuclear energy is the 2nd best energy power after hydroelectric dams.

>Contaminates underground water.
Nothin personnel, Juan.

Czechia

The best we have atm desu.

I remember Austrians have been sperging out about our Temelin power plant years ago. Eventually they got BTFO’d.

>cheap
No ones ever made one that hasn’t required government subsidies
>plentiful
Not really, if the whole world ran on the type of nuclear power plants we have now we’d only have power for a decade or so before all the uranium ran out

Nuclear energy is an out-dated technology that fell short of its exaggerated promises. Even decades after its inception risks and issues like the permanent storage problem haven't adequately addressed.

>permanent storage problem
Literally dig a deep hole or bury it in a cave. It's not like radioactivity only first exist when we utilize it.

>the permanent storage problem
Yes but you store the hazardous materials in one place you do not disperse them in the atmosphere like with coal.