That is because roofers have a higher death rate than those in the US military. Solar panels are often put on roofs.

Nuclear produces less waste than solar and wind power per kilowatt.

Nuclear power produces less radioactivity globally, annually than air traffic, smoke detectors, or televisions.

I can't believe I am saying this but "Why can't you be more like France?"

The only reason nobody likes nuclear power is because of 50 year old accidents using last gen nuclear technology and because all the deaths happen at once while with Coal, natural gas, solar, and wind the deaths are a steady stream. Its the same reason why people are more concerned about one death in Charlestown or 13 deaths in Spain over 100s of deaths in Chicago.

Edited 8/23/2017 03:43:49

I thought this was a joke by the title at first.

But I agree.

Nuclear power is great.

Link by a Vox video on YT which is well thought out and interesting and informative.
It's a leftist biased channel, like their coverage on the war in Ukraine and how putin is somehow a dictator which is not true.

Off topic but here it is


https://youtu.be/poPLSgbSO6k
https://youtu.be/poPLSgbSO6k
https://youtu.be/poPLSgbSO6k
https://youtu.be/poPLSgbSO6k

Smoke Detectors=RADIOACTIVE! Keep that Americium away!
Go nuclear power

^smoke detectors use alpha particles, which are safe unless ingested.

fuc nut

Flawed argument, but overall sound point. Both are great forms of energy.

It's a leftist biased channel, like their coverage on the war in Ukraine and how putin is somehow a dictator which is not true.

It's a fact that Putin is a dictator and a warmonger. Nothing biased about saying that.

Edited 8/23/2017 15:51:47

Nuclear power is great.

but nuclear waste is not, which is probably the main issue here.

There are a lot of myths and irrational fears surrounding nuclear power. Nuclear plants cannot cause a NUCLEAR EXPLOSION, and do not produce radiation (when functioning properly) that is a serious hazard to the surrounding population.

THAT BEING SAID, no political structure lasts long enough to responsibly utilize nuclear power. At some point, every nuclear plant will either be dismantled or end up a Fukishima or a Chernobyl. The United States will fall. Russia will fall. Governments have a shorter lifespan than radioactive material. Nuclear plants are key targets and global warfare will structurally compromise them. In the event of a nuclear or other catastrophic global war, it is likely the plants will be left unattended. An unattended nuclear plant without an emergency shutoff will inevitably lead to a radioactive catastrophe.

There is a conspiracy to destroy what little remains of American industry (the coal industry) through brainwashing the masses with "global warming" propaganda.

Wow, my comment got downvoted. A lot of brainwashed people here, that's for sure.

Vox is garbage

Edited 8/24/2017 00:21:22

THAT BEING SAID, no political structure lasts long enough to responsibly utilize nuclear power. At some point, every nuclear plant will either be dismantled or end up a Fukishima or a Chernobyl. The United States will fall. Russia will fall. Governments have a shorter lifespan than radioactive material. Nuclear plants are key targets and global warfare will structurally compromise them. In the event of a nuclear or other catastrophic global war, it is likely the plants will be left unattended. An unattended nuclear plant without an emergency shutoff will inevitably lead to a radioactive catastrophe.

that's actually a interesting thought

THAT BEING SAID, no political structure lasts long enough to responsibly utilize nuclear power. At some point, every nuclear plant will either be dismantled or end up a Fukushima or a Chernobyl. The United States will fall. Russia will fall. Governments have a shorter lifespan than radioactive material.

Not so.

Nuclear power plants are only operated for some fifty years. After decommissioning, it is technically a relatively easy task to safely and permanently sequester all the spent fuel.

Once sequestered the lifespan of the radioactive material has little relevance.

The fact that waste in the US has not been permanently sequestered is because of Politics which are informed by ignorance rather than expertise.

So why weren't Fukushima or Chernobyl decommissioned? That kind of forward thinking seems absent. No one knows when natural disaster or wars happen. You said it yourself, Politics are informed by ignorance rather than expertise. Then why trust bureaucracy with safely dismantling plants? Wouldn't they cut corners? There are alternative technologies that don't require deconstruction of plants and a million other precautions to prevent catastrophes.

Chernobyl was the result of some design decisions that were significantly less than ideal, along with the indispensable addition of a person in authority who was an arrogant fool. As bad as that person was he would have been stopped if the jackass in question had not operated in the authoritarian soviet culture.

Take a mediocre technology and operate it with superior people who are conscientious and you will have a good result.

Take a mediocre technology and operate it with mediocrities and if you are unlucky something very bad will happen.

So what is mediocre technology?

Sometimes it is amazing engineering, which has not been critiqued.

In the case of Fukushima you had what was very well engineered reactor with ancillary equipment that was not up to the stresses that were placed on it.

The current generation of Westinghouse Electric (AP1000) reactors are generation III+ designs with passive safety features.

Third generation designs improve on early designs by incorporating passive or inherent safety features which require no active controls or (human) operational intervention to avoid accidents in the event of malfunction, and may rely on pressure differentials, gravity, natural convection, or the natural response of materials to high temperatures.

What this means is that in the event of malfunction no operator intervention is required. One feature of the Westinghouse design is that in the event of a shut down combined with a loss of auxiliary power (which was needed at Fukushima to power coolant circulation) the reactor is designed in such a manner that it would cool off without any power or operator control in such a manner that no damage to the plant would occur.

The degree of safety for such designs is awe inspiring.

On March 27, 2008, South Carolina Electric & Gas applied to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a Combined Construction and Operating License (COL) to build two 1,100 MW AP1000 pressurized water reactors at the site. On May 27, 2008, SCE&G and Santee Cooper announced an engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contract had been reached with Westinghouse. Costs were estimated to be approximately $9.8 billion for both AP1000 units, plus transmission facility and financing costs.

Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgil_C._Summer_Nuclear_Generating_Station

Unfortunately Westinghouse as run by its current owners Toshiba is quite bad when it comes to accounting. They underbid their South Carolina project. As general contractor they are fully responsible for cost overruns. And there have been massive cost overruns. As a result they have declared bankruptcy.

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/climate/nuclear-power-project-canceled-in-south-carolina.html

Edited 8/25/2017 13:48:36

That is the primary issue with nuclear power. It isn't failsafe. Mistakes lead to catastrophe. The very fact that a series of complex safety measures must be taken to prevent disaster, as you've just described, is exactly why nuclear power is an exercise in futility.

No reactor is safe after being structurally compromised. The mere existence of fuel rods and radioactive waste is the problem. No safety switch will prevent a reactor from being destroyed by modern weaponry.

We need technology that can be destroyed safely. A coal plant doesn't require mass evacuation from a hundred mile radius if it gets blown up. Having a series of ticking radioactive time bombs as key infrastructure is a strategic mistake.