3 ms·
Nuclear Isn't Needed for the Green New Deal
- natch 7y agoI love that the article mentions one of my biggest gripes with nuclear power, that it does not lend itself to scaling down to the level of the individual household. The inescapable implication is that nuclear is inherently a centralized, big government or big industry solution... in stark contrast to household-scale solutions like solar and wind, which tend to promote the preservation of individual freedom and self determination, since control can stay with the individual owners.
- mimixco 7y agoGreat point! When I attended the NRC hearing over the proposed new nuclear plant for Turkey Point (FL), a local mayor produced evidence that Florida Power & Light could put solar panels and Tesla batteries on every home in their market area for less than the cost of building another nuclear plant. The future of green energy lies in decentralizing its production.
- verdverm 7y agoWhat about the thorium reactors and the enegry levels needed for large scale industry? What pollution is created when a hurricane or tornado destroys a solar farm? (Think of all the nasty materials on the inside which leech into the ground water). All solutions have drawbacks, that's why we call them tradeoffs.
- mimixco 7y agoMetals can be filtered out of water. But nothing can remove nuclear subatomic particles from the Earth. Once something is radioactive, it continues to emit particles which fly off into the environment and contaminate their surroundings. Heavy metals don't do this.