-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Nuclear power
- Thread starter eledille
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Energy Environment Policy
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
As if we needed more evidence that the nuclear industry and nuclear proponents never cared about climate change. It's about supporting an obsolete technology and always was.
The environmentalist's apology: how Michael Shellenberger unsettled some of his prominent supporters
The environmentalist's apology: how Michael Shellenberger unsettled some of his prominent supporters
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
I don't understand how this evolved into such a pathetic cult. I worked in nuclear for ~15 years. First in the USN then commercially. It was clear it wasn't a viable solution for economic reasons. Like.... super, SUPER clear. Like... fool cells are FAR less efficient than BEVs clear. I moved on to support something that had a chance of being part of the solution. I don't understand why so many people wish to die on the nuclear hill. What's the attraction?
It's crazy... if you ask a nuke zealot what cost delta is acceptable most of them are of the opinion that even if wind and solar are free nuclear is STILL the better option even at $20/w
mspohr
Well-Known Member
I think this is mostly driven by the profits to be made in building, operating and charging high prices for power from nuclear. The money allows them to ignore the costs to everyone else.I don't understand how this evolved into such a pathetic cult. I worked in nuclear for ~15 years. First in the USN then commercially. It was clear it wasn't a viable solution for economic reasons. Like.... super, SUPER clear. Like... fool cells are FAR less efficient than BEVs clear. I moved on to support something that had a chance of being part of the solution. I don't understand why so many people wish to die on the nuclear hill. What's the attraction?
It's crazy... if you ask a nuke zealot what cost delta is acceptable most of them are of the opinion that even if wind and solar are free nuclear is STILL the better option even at $20/w
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
That explains the industry but not their dozens of ardent supporters like Shill'n - berger...
mspohr
Well-Known Member
Follow the money.
Shill'n-berger is "supported" by the nuclear industry.
According to the latest publicly available financial records, Environmental Progress earned US$809,000 in revenue in 2017 from gifts, grants and donations.
In the process of researching this article, Guardian Australia emailed questions to Shellenberger to clarify why Forbes had removed his article and who funded his organisation.
A third question related to a 2017 internal report from the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) which said the institute, which represents the nuclear energy industry, had “engaged third parties to engage with media through interviews and op-eds” and named “environmentalist Michael Shellenberger” as one of those it had engaged.
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
I think all that Shill'n-berger managed to do is refresh the discussion on just how terrible of an idea wasting more limited time and money on new nuclear is in 2020....
I would argue that the cost and timeline of any additional nuclear plants represent a challenge ~10x greater than the intermittence of renewables.
We've been having the wrong debate about nuclear energy
I would argue that the cost and timeline of any additional nuclear plants represent a challenge ~10x greater than the intermittence of renewables.
We've been having the wrong debate about nuclear energy
mspohr
Well-Known Member
As if the inability to vary output is an advantage.
That's one of the better articles I've read on decarbonization but I think it still has a nuclear bias since it treats the investment requirements as the same, when there is clearly a huge difference.
Cheap renewables means it's they're growing rapidly and mean that it's easy to attract investment for anything related.
Plus, battery technology has a bunch of different applications, so even without variable renewables it'll continue to have large scale investment, and the cheaper that becomes, the fewer other dispatchable sources you'd need.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
ComEd Bribery Scandal Clouds Picture for Exelon’s Illinois Nuclear Plants
Last month, ComEd agreed to pay a $200 million fine as part of a deferred prosecution agreement with federal prosecutors to avoid criminal liability in an alleged bribery scheme involving Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan.
Last month, ComEd agreed to pay a $200 million fine as part of a deferred prosecution agreement with federal prosecutors to avoid criminal liability in an alleged bribery scheme involving Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
Final canister of nuclear waste transferred to storage facility at San Onofre
“It’s a sad day,” said Ray Lutz, national coordinator for the advocacy group Citizens’ Oversight. “People say, well, [the waste issue] is fine right now and we’ll deal with it later. But this is what they’ve said ever since they started this nuclear industry — we’ll figure it out later, the five favorite words.”
As thorny as the transfer operations were, a more complicated issue remains: how long the canisters will stay there.
SONGS is not unique. About 80,000 metric tons of waste from commercial nuclear plants are stored across the country — 121 sites in 35 states — because the federal government has not constructed a repository to store any of it.
“It’s a sad day,” said Ray Lutz, national coordinator for the advocacy group Citizens’ Oversight. “People say, well, [the waste issue] is fine right now and we’ll deal with it later. But this is what they’ve said ever since they started this nuclear industry — we’ll figure it out later, the five favorite words.”
As thorny as the transfer operations were, a more complicated issue remains: how long the canisters will stay there.
SONGS is not unique. About 80,000 metric tons of waste from commercial nuclear plants are stored across the country — 121 sites in 35 states — because the federal government has not constructed a repository to store any of it.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Imagine if that fine just gets added to the taxpayer bill as an operation expense
nwdiver
Well-Known Member
The last glimmer of hope for nuclear power in the US in growing dimmer.
Northern Utah city opts out of planned nuclear power project over money concerns
Northern Utah city opts out of planned nuclear power project over money concerns
It doesn't make sense for a small municipal utility to participate in a project like the NuScale one at INL with up-front costs. If they can sign a PPA at justifiable rates, sure, go ahead as long as they only pay for power delivered. Putting up another lump sum over $600k without any promise of actual power delivery seems like it should be a non-starter.
After 48 Years, Democrats Endorse Nuclear Energy In Platform
In another argument towards both parties being the same when it comes to gross incompetence and contempt for the environment, the Democrats endorse nuclear power in the party plank.
In another argument towards both parties being the same when it comes to gross incompetence and contempt for the environment, the Democrats endorse nuclear power in the party plank.
Olkiluoto 3 further delayed, was supposed to be completed in 2009:
Further delay in commissioning of Finnish EPR : New Nuclear - World Nuclear News
Should we consider setting up a GoFundMe for the TCM members to donate and help get these long delayed nuclear projects completed
Uh, that would be a definite NO Mr. RubberToe !
RT
Further delay in commissioning of Finnish EPR : New Nuclear - World Nuclear News
Should we consider setting up a GoFundMe for the TCM members to donate and help get these long delayed nuclear projects completed
Uh, that would be a definite NO Mr. RubberToe !
RT
It's for more political than that. The Democrats are deliberately not _excluding_ some of the technologies in their platform, but they know full well what the current costs and cost trajectories are, so they can include nuclear and carbon capture to appease voters, when in reality they're really backing wind, solar, and geothermal.
Similar threads
