reply on: Nuclear energy continues to grow worldwide \ stacker news ~econ

pull down to refresh

75 sats \ 14 replies \ @Satosora 14 Jun \ on: Nuclear energy continues to grow worldwide econ

I do worry a bit about other countries having nuclear power. I suspect it is only a matter of time before china has a nuclear meltdown.

10 sats \ 1 reply \ @gmd 15 Jun

Weird I feel like I would trust China to command thousands into the fray to do whatever it takes to contain a meltdown. They would weld their own people into buildings if needed.

Other less wealthy countries I trust much less.

99 sats \ 0 replies \ @Satosora 15 Jun

I dont trust them at all. I bet they would buy inferior quality parts made in china and it would fail.

42 sats \ 11 replies \ @kilianbuhn 14 Jun

Modern reactors are much much better at security

Many modern small reactors are even designed in a way that catastrophe = cooling down when everything fails instead of nuclear fallout ⚛️

42 sats \ 10 replies \ @xz 14 Jun

with this said (sorry I know next to nothing about nuclear) would it be prudent to decommission old nuclear and build modern reactors with the hindsight of chenobyls and Tepcos in mind?

42 sats \ 6 replies \ @kilianbuhn 17 Jun

It costs millions of dollars, takes years to get them running, the advantage is minimal since old reactors meltdown almost never, and politically the people are allergic to the word nuclear

20 sats \ 1 reply \ @TomK OP 17 Jun

do you realize that Germany alone has invested over a trillion euros in the development of so-called renewable energies, which are completely inefficient compared to nuclear energy? you always have to put things like that into perspective, otherwise this statement makes no sense at all

42 sats \ 0 replies \ @Satosora 18 Jun

They found a way to irradiate the nuclear waste so after 80 years its inert.

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @TomK OP 17 Jun

42 sats \ 2 replies \ @kilianbuhn 17 Jun

I think you misread my comment or don't understand what i'm saying

I'm a big nuclear bull

7 sats \ 1 reply \ @TomK OP 17 Jun

Oh, yes then, but of course the media are also to blame for the fact that this form of energy has been dropped.

42 sats \ 0 replies \ @xz 17 Jun

I feel as if the world of nuclear enrgy is shrouded in mystery. I mean, obviously if you have a related specialism, industrial, business or pure scientific, you can dig out the relevant knowledge.

I suppose just the topic or Uranium alone, would be so huge, from a geological and geopolitical perspective. But as we've seemed to admit here, there's a huge lack of awareness of the perspective in terms of investment to long-term energy security ratio.

I'd love to know more about the industry, just feel in the dark. It's not even up for discussion in general media. My mentioning of the rare disaster's that have happened were more in relation to the bad press that nuclear gets.

Security is going to be an important angle, that much I can work out for myself.

7 sats \ 2 replies \ @TomK OP 14 Jun

Humanity needs this technology

42 sats \ 0 replies \ @Satosora 15 Jun freebie

Humanity needs reliable technology. This is one of them. Actually, humanity could do with a bit of a reset. We are producing so much energy, but we have become quite wasteful.

42 sats \ 0 replies \ @xz 14 Jun freebie

I can believe it. If there's the political willpower to provide energy, there's no reason why you would ignore options that science provides.

My question is borne out of the mismanagement of budgets and execution of even the smallest of projects (highways, transport etc.) Without a doubt Europe should excel in experience and scientific knowledge. Why would you not take advantage of that.