Namely, do you think it has a future in the wave of next gen clean energy sources? If you support it, do you think it will always be viable or that it should only be a temporary measure to get us off fossil fuels while our renewable infrastructure grows?

  • SnowCode
    121·
    4 years ago

    I spent a lot of time discussing with French people in YouTube comments. And I need to say that a lot of beliefs of nuclear energy are wrong.

    • France got a very good re-processing of nuclear wastes
    • Nuclear energy is the energy with the smallest mortality rate compared to any other energy. The worst being coal with 2 deaths per removedt
    • Nuclear energy is still pretty clean on a pollution side.

    I don’t like this energy but trying to throw it away, without reducing the demand, sounds impossible to me.

    Something I really regret about nuclear energy though is the fact that you are completely dependent on other countries and industries.

    So another belief (on the side of pro-nuclear this time) is the fact that it makes you independent of your own electricity. Except that all your uranium is coming from another countries, this is not what I call “independent”.

    TL;DR: I don’t like centralization of the electricity production. But with the current demand, it’s the only viable choice.

    • Scholar_Succulent
      4·
      4 years ago

      Could you alborate on your first claim ?

      France got a very good re-processing of nuclear wastes

      • SnowCode
        41·
        4 years ago

        They seem very advanced in the control of nuclear waste and know how to reprocess a good part of them. Everything is contained securely and they don’t seem to have any space problem with it. It’s the “ANDRA” (National Agency for the Management of Radioactive Waste) who do all of that.

          • SnowCode
            1·
            4 years ago

            I mean, ANDRA seems a bit more neutral. They are not there to promote nuclear energy. They are there to deal with the wastes. Not only from power plants, but also from the military, labs and medical (X-rays and stuff). In deed I don’t have any “proof” they do their work correctly, but they seems pretty transparent about it and publish everything on their website.

            • Scholar_Succulent
              2·
              4 years ago

              I’m not saying they are not doing their jobs, or that they do it badly, I’m saying that the jobs requires them to destroy forests, contaminate areas of land for centuries, and sometimes take decisions that are contrary to good practice, for example the choice of the site at Bure.

              • SnowCode
                1·
                4 years ago

                Yeah, that’s why I think calculations based on the surface took by such centrals is completely biased (it only counts the power plant, not the storage).

                The reason why I cite ANDRA is because they have the decency to be transparent about what they’re doing. Which was not the case in France in the past.

    • DessalinesA
      11·
      4 years ago

      I’m still on the fence about nuclear, and centralized vs decentralized energy production (bc decentralized relies on batteries where the materials are mined under terrible conditions, not to mention the batteries themselves are terrible for the environment) . I wonder if anyone’s done a comparison of nuclear vs solar, in terms of waste byproducts and mining ethics, bc I bet its probably closer or even possibly more in favor of nuclear than many think.