№2436325[Quote]
Opposing nuclear is gay and retarded btw
№2436366[Quote]
b-but muh chernobyl.. muh fukushima
№2436370[Quote]
>>2436318 (OP)muh chernobyl
muh green liquid from the Simpsons
That's why we NEED coal and memefuels!
№2436373[Quote]
what about the glowing green goop doe
№2436393[Quote]
>>2436318 (OP)geg imagine having a nuke station in ur country
№2436408[Quote]
>>2436392False.
The majority of nuclear waste can be reusable via fast breeder reactors and which consume less uranium yet use most of it
We still have abundant uranium in the Earth's crust, by 2080 we'd probably have working thorium reactors, thorium by the way is 3-4x more common than uranium and as common as gallium.
Since uranium can do so much so little, if we reuse the so-called waste we have today we wouldn't need to mine a gram of uranium for centuries if not millennia.
№2436414[Quote]
>>2436366>>2436370Honestly one of the most niggerly stupid arguments against nuclear
Chernobyl had a shitty nuclear design due to oversight by the soviets + general incompetence, had Chernobyl used a western design it wouldn't have happened at all
Fukushima happened because of unprecedented events (A powerful earthquake followed by a large tsunami) Plus, the reactor itself only killed 1, the majority of deaths were because of the people fleeing and mental health or something.
№2436441[Quote]
>Muh green goo in yellow barrel!
Doesn't look like that, the waste is solid not liquid like the elephants foot, plus the majority of that damn waste is reusable via fast breeder reactors
>It takes too long/Too expensive!
It takes that long because of the process and idiotic bureaucracy, being forced to make a new unique design every time instead of having a standardized design and treating reactors as something unique instead of something you can mass produce like a Boeing Jet.
In actuality, nuclear should only cost 2 billion for each reactor and only take 2-3 years (Smr) while large ones about 3-6 years
Breeder reactors especially, they're smaller yet more powerful.
№2436468[Quote]
>>2436441>being forced to make a new unique design every time instead of having a standardized design and treating reactors as something unique instead of something you can mass produce like a Boeing Jet.Why is this happening?
№2436469[Quote]
Ni hao taiwan-chan. Did you hear the theory about oil companies investing into "green energy" political parties or initiatives as a way to prevent nuclear power from gaining dominance by promoting the opposition to be solar panels and wind turbines that never produce enough power.
Here's a list of some of the organizations
Organization
Funder/Source
Amount/Details
Anti-Nuclear Activity
Source
Friends of the Earth (FoE)
Atlantic Richfield (ARCO, oil company) via CEO Robert O. Anderson
$200,000 in 1970 (equivalent to ~$1.5M today); $80,000 founding donation in 1969
Early campaigns against nuclear plants, citing safety and costs; helped shape global anti-nuclear movement.
Forbes (2016); Environmental Progress (2017)
Sierra Club
Chesapeake Energy (major US gas driller) via CEO Aubrey McClendon; also via Rockefeller Foundation (oil-linked)
$25M+ from 2007-2010; total $136M from nat gas/renewables interests
Lobbied for nuclear plant closures (e.g., Diablo Canyon in CA); promoted gas as a "bridge fuel" over nuclear.
TIME (via Quora); Environmental Progress (2017); CapX (2022)
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
Fossil fuel/renewables investors
Minimum $70M invested in oil/gas/renewables firms
Pushed for nuclear shutdowns in NY, IL, and PA; holds $7.7M in renewables funds benefiting from nuclear closures.
Environmental Progress (2017); Forbes (2016)
Environmental Defense Fund (EDF)
Oil/gas/renewables investors
Minimum $60M
Environmental Progress (2017); Wikipedia (Anti-nuclear movement)
№2436478[Quote]
>>2436468Retarded govs and more retarded opposition from environmentalists (ironically) and hippies
France fixed this and they made 56 between 1977 and 1999, it was originally meant for 170 by 2000 but again, opposition.
№2436491[Quote]
>>2436469>TheoryNope, it's an open secret at this point, and yes.
The German Greens for example are deep in the pockets of big oil/gas, by being in retarded they rolled out Germany's plants and instead wasted 500 billion euros on useless and shitty renewables like wind and solar instead of going nuclear like France and using that money to build reactors
In general, the majority of nuclear opposition is from fossil fuels/groups they fund indirectly or directly.
№2436499[Quote]
>>2436491Wind and solar have to be one of the worst overhyped renewable garbage out there
Governments worldwide wasted billions to trillions making these that only eat up the land and waste resources that barely work properly, Solar needs the sun, unless you're in the Sahara or Middle East good luck, wind especially since you need it constantly and it's not guaranteed
plus these need/use expensive rare earth materials that only harm the planet further.
№2436522[Quote]
>>2436507The only thing that comes close to, if not surpasses, nuclear is fusion, but it's a bit in the future at the moment.
№2436523[Quote]
>>2436491>The German Greens for example are deep in the pockets of big oil/gas,ngl, this is scary af
№2436568[Quote]
>>2436392retard here, is it possible to find uranium in other parts of the Solar System?
№2436642[Quote]
but if thorium and shit didn't exist?
is that estimate correct, that it will run out in 2080?
or is that only the uranium that is currently known and more could be found if prospected?
№2436651[Quote]
Steal some cobalt-60, make it into a sphere, submerge it inside a lead warhead with heavy water, hit with a DIY linear particle accelerator and see what happens.
№2436930[Quote]
>>2436392The 1/2life of uranium is longer than human civilisation itself
№2437002[Quote]
It has a high startup cost
That's literally it
>Infinitely more clean than coal and gas
>Infinitely more powerful than wind or solar
>Uses less water than hydroelectric
>Better for the environment than hydroelectric and wind
>Uses significantly less land than solar
>Waste products can be stored in up-to-grade containers in an abandoned kmart
№2437019[Quote]
>>2437003meds I'm not shitting on nuclear I'm shitting on people who hate nuclear
№2437178[Quote]
>>2437019no i think he's just shitting on you
alot of people do not like you
№2437204[Quote]
>>2437178I know but I don't care
№2437807[Quote]
>>2437002The reason why its expensive to build one in the first place is because of the stupid process and govs making new designs for every reactor instead of having the same design and using that and also mass producing them in factories