Hydroelectric and geothermal and solar are all pretty green. Nuclear is a marvel, but nuclear ☢️ has its own issues. Fukushima Daiichi could have been much worse and it may be worse than most realize. Experts say another Chernobyl is virtually impossible, but experts are often surprised by things deemed unlikely happening given time and human nature.
And nuclear is not nearly as reliable as advertised. Look up the big fiasco of the San Onofre nuclear plant. Now there’s a radioactive eyesore on the SoCal coast to the tune of billions of dollars.
And nothing is heard about all the other plants in the US and in Europe and Asia. We hear about Fukushima and Chernobyl and San Onofre because they unusual and nuclear power so sensitive a political topic.
Tell me about all the accidents and lives lost during major disasters in coal and gas plants. These places aren't political, so we don't hear about them.
EDIT: And let's not forget the original issue here, that these wind farms and solar farms do not function as intended in all cases. Nuclear, coal, and gas do.
The more complicated an engineering project the more possible failure modes. San Onofre was a big deal because it didn’t just lead to the utility screwing all the rate payers in a very populous area, it meant the entire grid supply was compromised. The greedy utility here in San Diego had used the existence of San Onofre as a justification for closing down gas fired turbines by the coast because they weren’t really needed (but in reality San Onofre ended up failing and getting mothballed prematurely but the leaker plants here were already gone and the land sold).
I am not anti nuclear, but it’s simply not accurate to depict it as this great deal that works with no issues.
While coal fired plants don’t have disasters resulting in sudden multi billion dollar losses the burning of coal actually introduces way more radioactivity into the air. Coal mining is obviously dangerous and hard work, but the operation of a coal plant can be akin to having people unknowingly smoke.
New modular nuclear power plants are safe and run for 20 years. Just pop the lid and replace the reactor core. Recycle the uranium and store the rad waste at Yucca.
Chernobyl had a design flaw, graphite moderators. Fukushima's backup generators worked kept the control rods cool (after a 9.1 mag temblor w/ tsunami) but the replacement batteries were the wrong type. The reactor core melted into a sustained critical mass, along with control rods in cooling tanks. But Japan is using robots to try to separate the melted core into sub-critical segments.
Hydroelectric and geothermal and solar are all pretty green. Nuclear is a marvel, but nuclear ☢️ has its own issues. Fukushima Daiichi could have been much worse and it may be worse than most realize. Experts say another Chernobyl is virtually impossible, but experts are often surprised by things deemed unlikely happening given time and human nature.
And nuclear is not nearly as reliable as advertised. Look up the big fiasco of the San Onofre nuclear plant. Now there’s a radioactive eyesore on the SoCal coast to the tune of billions of dollars.
And nothing is heard about all the other plants in the US and in Europe and Asia. We hear about Fukushima and Chernobyl and San Onofre because they unusual and nuclear power so sensitive a political topic.
Tell me about all the accidents and lives lost during major disasters in coal and gas plants. These places aren't political, so we don't hear about them.
EDIT: And let's not forget the original issue here, that these wind farms and solar farms do not function as intended in all cases. Nuclear, coal, and gas do.
The more complicated an engineering project the more possible failure modes. San Onofre was a big deal because it didn’t just lead to the utility screwing all the rate payers in a very populous area, it meant the entire grid supply was compromised. The greedy utility here in San Diego had used the existence of San Onofre as a justification for closing down gas fired turbines by the coast because they weren’t really needed (but in reality San Onofre ended up failing and getting mothballed prematurely but the leaker plants here were already gone and the land sold).
I am not anti nuclear, but it’s simply not accurate to depict it as this great deal that works with no issues.
While coal fired plants don’t have disasters resulting in sudden multi billion dollar losses the burning of coal actually introduces way more radioactivity into the air. Coal mining is obviously dangerous and hard work, but the operation of a coal plant can be akin to having people unknowingly smoke.
New modular nuclear power plants are safe and run for 20 years. Just pop the lid and replace the reactor core. Recycle the uranium and store the rad waste at Yucca.
Chernobyl had a design flaw, graphite moderators. Fukushima's backup generators worked kept the control rods cool (after a 9.1 mag temblor w/ tsunami) but the replacement batteries were the wrong type. The reactor core melted into a sustained critical mass, along with control rods in cooling tanks. But Japan is using robots to try to separate the melted core into sub-critical segments.