Because the radioactive bits need to be handled by trained and trusted personnel because if those bits fall into the wrong hands they can be used for some horrible shit
My biggest concern here is the “wrong hands” part. I absolutely believe that nuclear waste can be stored safely for a very long time, but I know from experience that safety is a distant concern next to minimizing costs for a company. We have companies breach environmental protection rules all the time, and yet some people still see the EPA as too powerful and want to tear it down. How do we ensure that waste is actually stored safely?
There are different degrees of safety associated with all things and we as a society have deemed nuclear power plants and their fuel as something that should only be in the hands of those trained and trusted in how to use it
Coal is filthy, but this is a myth and also an attempt at paltering.
Someone compared a poorly filtered coal plant running cherry picked coal to a brand new nuclear plant in the middle of its fuel cycle once decades ago and got the expected result.
When you open it and get the fuel out and when you mine the fuel it’s orders of magnitude more. Reprocessing plants like La Hague under normal operation release more of the long lived radiation than fukushima and TMI combined.
I lived less than 2 miles from a coal power station (until they pulled it down). By the owners own admission, when it was running, it released about 60kg of radioactive material a year from stuff that was in the coal.
I live less than 2 miles from the last remaining coal power station in England.
I would much rather have nuclear instead of a chimney chucking god knows what into the air (and subsequently into me) for my entire life.
Fun fact, coal plants produce more radiation into their environment than nuclear plants
Modern reactor designs are so damn safe it’s insane
That wasn’t fun at all.
Fun fact, you are correct
If they are so damn safe why i can’t build one in my backyard?
Because the radioactive bits need to be handled by trained and trusted personnel because if those bits fall into the wrong hands they can be used for some horrible shit
My biggest concern here is the “wrong hands” part. I absolutely believe that nuclear waste can be stored safely for a very long time, but I know from experience that safety is a distant concern next to minimizing costs for a company. We have companies breach environmental protection rules all the time, and yet some people still see the EPA as too powerful and want to tear it down. How do we ensure that waste is actually stored safely?
By ensuring that said power plants aren’t run by corporate interests and investors concerned with the bottom line above all else.
so are you saying that it is not safe?
Everything can be unsafe if in the wrong hands
There are different degrees of safety associated with all things and we as a society have deemed nuclear power plants and their fuel as something that should only be in the hands of those trained and trusted in how to use it
Have you ever been in a coal fired plant? Or even easier, been around a coal furnace for home heating? What about industrial environments?
That shit isn’t safe.
There are different levels of safety, personal reactors are on the other side of a cultural shift.
Because few governments scared about nuclear bombs more
If planes are safer than cars, why can’t I fly a Boeing 797-9 Dreamliner?
Chew on that for a while.
Because perhaps they are not
Coal is filthy, but this is a myth and also an attempt at paltering.
Someone compared a poorly filtered coal plant running cherry picked coal to a brand new nuclear plant in the middle of its fuel cycle once decades ago and got the expected result.
When you open it and get the fuel out and when you mine the fuel it’s orders of magnitude more. Reprocessing plants like La Hague under normal operation release more of the long lived radiation than fukushima and TMI combined.
I lived less than 2 miles from a coal power station (until they pulled it down). By the owners own admission, when it was running, it released about 60kg of radioactive material a year from stuff that was in the coal.
It’s called fly ash and releases more radioactivity into the environment than a nuclear power plant producing the save amount of electricity. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste/
I would rather have a gun pointed at me than a bazooka, that doesn’t mean i should have a weapon pointed at me.
We can solve a problem without generating another one. There are better alternatives to nuclear.
Removed by mod
This isn’t true at all, I’m pro nuclear but battery fields and full renewables is still an option, albeit more expensive as it stands
To be honest nuclear power is pretty damn safe, safer than wind and only beat by solar.
Chart comparing sources of electricity per terrawatt hour vs deaths.
Source
Edit: small clarification
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_energy
And that isn’t a counter argument.
Just because coal is bad doesn’t mean that nuclear isn’t bad though.