4 ms·

Don‘t forget all the CO2 emitted a) at mining and enriching uranium and b) in storing nuclear waste for 100000 years and c) in tearing down highly radioactive r

Don‘t forget all the CO2 emitted a) at mining and enriching uranium and b) in storing nuclear waste for 100000 years and c) in tearing down highly radioactive retired nuclear power plants. In Germany we started tearing down the GDRs only nuclear power plant in the early 90s and we‘re still not done. 30+ years of daily ops of a highly specialised destruction company operating heavy machinery requiring insulation from radiation. And 1000s of tons more radioactive waste that needs to be shipped around the country. Well, only 20 plants more to go, now that we exited. Somehow people who claim nuclear to be green only look at the CO2 emissions when ready made enriched uranium goes in and burnt fuel comes out. We need to look at the full life cycle of both the plants and the nuclear fuel though, and then nuclear energy‘s CO2 emissions are far far away frm being green.

mlindner 5y ago
CO2 is only emitted during mining and refining because the grid itself isn't clean. The same thing is true of solar panels and batteries until the grid is made green. But you can't say "we can't make green tech because it would produce CO2" as it completely ignores the lifetime of things. > in storing nuclear waste for 100000 years That's a red herring. You only need to store nuclear waste for around 100 years (or less) before it can be treated as "low level nuclear waste" of which tons of it is generated as byproducts of the medical industry. It doesn't need to be sequestered away, it can be buried safely like all the rest of the low level waste. At that point it's more toxic than it is radioactive so it just needs to be buried in a way that it won't enter the water table. > In Germany we started tearing down the GDRs only nuclear power plant in the early 90s and we‘re still not done. Germany is also building tons of highly polluting (and radioactive waste pumped into the air) lignite coal power plants because they shot themselves in the foot by shutting down their very successful nuclear industry. They should look to France for an example on how one should treat nuclear power.
- beders 5y ago
  oh yeah, the French are so confident with their nuclear power plants they built many of them on their eastern border (with mostly west winds blowing any fall out nicely into Belgium and Germany)
  - mlindner 5y ago
    Oh please. Don't lie on hacker news, especially on something so verifiable. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Nuclear_power_plants_map_France-fr.svg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Nuclear_... And another version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nuclear_power_plants_map_France-en_2.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nuclear_power_plants_map_...
- whatever1 5y ago
  Wow, just avoided all of the points with what-about answers
  - mlindner 5y ago
    No, they're not what-about answers. They're cause and effect. Germany's coal sector is growing BECAUSE of shutting down it's nuclear sector. The other points are simply false (nuclear waste isn't dangerous for nearly as long, and his CO2 comment is actually a "what-about" complaint as a reason to not want nuclear power).
m0zg 5y ago
Yep. And now you'll be spewing slightly radioactive exhaust into the atmosphere after burning Russian gas. Whoop-te-do, very green indeed, congratulations, you "won". You also get to pay twice as much for electricity as the French, because the French aren't as easily fooled. And the gap will widen - the French are building more reactors.
tomjen3 5y ago
I absolutely agree with you that we should not let communists build nuclear powerplants, just as we should not let them build anything else. As for the storage - Sahara, Gobi, Arizona - plenty of useless land where we can put a few football stadions full of nuclear waste. Your plan to solve global warming is either based on and around nuclear power, or you do not have a plan to solve global warming.

mlindner 5y ago

CO2 is only emitted during mining and refining because the grid itself isn't clean. The same thing is true of solar panels and batteries until the grid is made green. But you can't say "we can't make green tech because it would produce CO2" as it completely ignores the lifetime of things. > in storing nuclear waste for 100000 years That's a red herring. You only need to store nuclear waste for around 100 years (or less) before it can be treated as "low level nuclear waste" of which tons of it is generated as byproducts of the medical industry. It doesn't need to be sequestered away, it can be buried safely like all the rest of the low level waste. At that point it's more toxic than it is radioactive so it just needs to be buried in a way that it won't enter the water table. > In Germany we started tearing down the GDRs only nuclear power plant in the early 90s and we‘re still not done. Germany is also building tons of highly polluting (and radioactive waste pumped into the air) lignite coal power plants because they shot themselves in the foot by shutting down their very successful nuclear industry. They should look to France for an example on how one should treat nuclear power.

beders 5y ago
oh yeah, the French are so confident with their nuclear power plants they built many of them on their eastern border (with mostly west winds blowing any fall out nicely into Belgium and Germany)
- mlindner 5y ago
  Oh please. Don't lie on hacker news, especially on something so verifiable. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Nuclear_power_plants_map_France-fr.svg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Nuclear_... And another version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nuclear_power_plants_map_France-en_2.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nuclear_power_plants_map_...
whatever1 5y ago
Wow, just avoided all of the points with what-about answers
- mlindner 5y ago
  No, they're not what-about answers. They're cause and effect. Germany's coal sector is growing BECAUSE of shutting down it's nuclear sector. The other points are simply false (nuclear waste isn't dangerous for nearly as long, and his CO2 comment is actually a "what-about" complaint as a reason to not want nuclear power).

m0zg 5y ago

Yep. And now you'll be spewing slightly radioactive exhaust into the atmosphere after burning Russian gas. Whoop-te-do, very green indeed, congratulations, you "won". You also get to pay twice as much for electricity as the French, because the French aren't as easily fooled. And the gap will widen - the French are building more reactors.

tomjen3 5y ago

I absolutely agree with you that we should not let communists build nuclear powerplants, just as we should not let them build anything else. As for the storage - Sahara, Gobi, Arizona - plenty of useless land where we can put a few football stadions full of nuclear waste. Your plan to solve global warming is either based on and around nuclear power, or you do not have a plan to solve global warming.