Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

6

zombie_berkman wrote

Not any time soon. It is way cleaner than coal and way easier to make than massive dams.

3

Enkara wrote

We could use less power.

and/or make a global HVDC energy grid and use solar everywhere and not give a fuck about batteries.

6

Defasher wrote (edited )

Most certainly. There's no way anyone can claim the nuclear industry is sustainable when it generates so much toxic waste that they have no way to dispose of.

If it means people will have to ration power and use only energy efficient devices, big whoop. Important places like hospitals all have generators anyway, so no one is going to die because there's less power available.

2

mftrhu wrote

There's no way anyone can claim the nuclear industry is sustainable when it generates so much toxic waste that they have no way to dispose of.

That waste can be burned, extracting even more energy to boot. The current designs of nuclear reactors are being used because they are both more costly and because uranium is more plentiful than what was expected, so work on breeder reactors was pretty much abandoned.

2

DissidentRage wrote

The efficiency of capitalism: standing in the way of scientific progress because it can't make a quick buck off of it.

4

sudo wrote

No. Once we get to a point where we can power the entire world with clean, renewable energy, then we can do away with it. Until then, it may be the only clean option for some cities.

2

Enkara wrote

Until there's an accident, then it's very not clean.

1

Emery wrote

Overall, it's still cleaner than coal.

1

Defasher wrote

Capitalism is still better than fascism, doesn't make it right.

1

Emery wrote

Yeah, capitalism is better than fascism, but it still doesn't help 99% of people. Nuclear power can help stop global warming.

1

zod wrote

That's like cutting off a foot to save a hand.

1

Emery wrote

I'd do that. Hands are more important than feet.

1

zod wrote

eventually you'll run out of things to cut off.

0

Emery wrote

Except, not before you don't need to.

Also, nuclear power isn't like cutting off a foot. I should've said that earlier.

1

zod wrote

0

Emery wrote

Yeah, no. To be honest, it isn't like cutting off a foot, it's like cutting off a toe. Not even the big toe.

About the story: That's 986 times normal. What is normal radiation, though? It's actually really low.

3

Enkara wrote

Yes, nuclear power was a bad idea.

I'm OK with nuclear powered spacecraft and nuclear research/medicine though.

2

tnstaec wrote

Absolutely. Besides creating toxic waste that lasts for thousands of years, it's an inherently authoritarian technology.

2

surreal wrote

For large scale it would be obsolete, if we can make proper use of cleaner energy sources, but for small scale, if we can fully control it, it may be the only way in some cases, like in space or in deep sea.