Current Events > Why don't we use more nuclear energy?

(+) Yeah! (+)

With that and electric cars we wouldn't need to burn oil/gas.
---

Because how are oil companies going to profit off of it
---

josifrees posted...

Because how are oil companies going to profit off of it

It's super sad that you aren't joking, and that this is probably the real answer.
---

People are scared of nuclear power.
---

Okay, but then why doesn't Europe use more nuclear power? I see many articles on places like Reddit where people talk about Ireland, UK, Germany, or countries like that on track for reliance on solar or wind power. But I understand countries like Australia and such have massive uranium mines and have much uranium available. So why do countries that do not appear to be bought by the fossil fuel industry still not use nuclear?
---

josifrees posted...

Because how are oil companies going to profit off of it

This and fear of nuclear disasters. After all, Japan moved to get rid of all their nuclear power plants after Fukushima.
---

uwnim posted...

People are scared of nuclear power.

This prevents a lot of people from supporting it. Even if their fears are irrational, the handful of tragedies associated with it are so memorable it outweighs everything else for many people.

They are also super-expensive to build and need to be built in certain areas, which means you might find yourself fighting the state in more than a few cases.
---

Well solar and wind are a lot cleaner than nuclear as well. You need to dispose of radioactive waste and it is not pretty nor easy at all
---

Three Mile Island
Chernobyl
Fukushima

Don't really need to add to the nuclear disasters in the world
---

I think we should use more nuclear energy, but one has to consider that they can be dangerous and the waste is hazardous.
---

EyeWontBeFooled posted...

Three Mile Island
Chernobyl
Fukushima

Don't really need to add to the nuclear disasters in the world

Not even mentioning the countless waste disposal sites that are leaking
---

EyeWontBeFooled posted...

Three Mile Island
Chernobyl
Fukushima

Don't really need to add to the nuclear disasters in the world

Weren't the first two on super outdated technology? We have lots of fail safe stuff now.
---

EyeWontBeFooled posted...

Three Mile Island
Chernobyl
Fukushima

Don't really need to add to the nuclear disasters in the world

If those are the only examples one can think of, then statically speaking nuclear power is actually exceptionally safe. We're perhaps giving those catastrophes too much weight, especially the first two. Given the role of natural disasters in causing the Fukushima Power Plant incident I think the best engineering controls you have at your disposal is putting it somewhere where things are relatively tame and immune to natural disasters that can actually disrupt it's operation.
---

What up TC the cost of nuclear power is very expensive and plants always require lots of government subsidies, the wastes created are dangerous for a few thousand years and without anywhere safe to store them for the long term, and the environmental risks are high (look into Fukushima to see how that is going.)

Using radiation to boil water to turn a turbine is not a safe or cost efficient way to make power in the 21st century.

uwnim posted...

People are scared of nuclear power.

lol at implying that public opinion matters even a little in this
---

Oil and natural gas are relatively low in price so there isnt any (market) pressure to move away from them for nuclear energy.

Hike up folks electric and gas bills twofold and the tune on nuclear energy would change pretty quick

Link HT posted...

uwnim posted...

People are scared of nuclear power.

lol at implying that public opinion matters even a little in this

It does, but not directly.

The perceived danger of nuclear power makes campaigning for it practically impossible. You know exactly how opposing advocacy groups would craft this. And it would super effective on anyone who was uninformed or anyone who was slightly sympathetic to them, which is most people.
---

The Simpsons ruined its image.
---

Nuclear power makes nuclear waste.
Nuclear waste thats been building up since....1978?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwY2E0hjGuU
---

Doe posted...

EyeWontBeFooled posted...

Three Mile Island
Chernobyl
Fukushima

Don't really need to add to the nuclear disasters in the world

Weren't the first two on super outdated technology? We have lots of fail safe stuff now.

If Japan can't get it right and fucked it up I really don't think any other country should be screwing with it
---

Republicans don't want to hurt oil profits.
Democrats are scared of environmental impact.
---

It costs billions of dollars and takes like a decade to build a plant and it has a negative stigma associated with it.
---

Roughly 61% of the Texan economy is tied to the oil industry. States like Texas rely on oil. Saudi Arabia and much of the middle east relies on oil to be competitively priced because their economy depends on it.

Its not in their best interest to look for alternatives. Why would they? It doesn't benefit the oil industry. Business wise it makes sense to lobby against nuclear energy and to launch propaganda to "influence" public perception on nuclear energy.

Imagine if we didn't have to pay for gas. Imagine if semi trucks didn't use diesel to deliver goods. Costs of goods would go down because capitalism. Paying for oil is like paying a hidden tax for transportation.
---

Plus earthquakes can happen anywhere, sinkholes pop up too often ,this is one of those times the ends don't justify the means . One mistake and your stuck with thousands of acres of land that makes your brains flesh & bones melt by stepping on it without any warning till its too late, plus all the airborne/ water that the radiation goes in to, apparently when Chernobyl happen a lot of that came over to the US in the clouds and rained on upstate new York and that's why cancers are pretty serious around here .
---

Also there's the issue of waste storage we haven't found a solution for yet except to bury it in the desert. I'm a proponent of nuclear energy but it's far from perfect.
---

As someone that lives less than a mile from a nuclear reactor, it for the most part is safe but if something goes wrong you are fucked and the whole place around the plant will not be able to be inhabited for thousands of years.
---

Chernobyl
---

People do not realize that there are various technologies and automatically assume all forms of nuclear power generation are equally dangerous. It is difficult to campaign for something that is almost universally perceived negatively.

I do not believe China and India are mistaken in pursuing Thorium reactors, but I doubt we'll see another in the US any day soon.
---