4 ms·

How can it be called "clean" when it produces toxic waste that requires its own infrastructure and expertise to be handled. I think you meant "co2-emission-fre

How can it be called "clean" when it produces toxic waste that requires its own infrastructure and expertise to be handled. I think you meant "co2-emission-free-while-operating"

adrianN 4y ago
Nothing humans do is "clean", so you always have to read the word in context. In the sixties the alternative would've been coal which in comparison is less clean.
- VyperCard 4y ago
  It’s still euphemistic and you know it.
  - adrianN 4y ago
    I don't think so. What would be "clean" energy for you? Renewables also take considerable resources to build. I assume you weigh nuclear waste very heavily, but I don't believe it to be such a serious problem. There is not that much highly radioactive waste being produced. I prefer renewables over nuclear because I think that in the end they'll be cheaper while being okay for the environment. But I would be very easily convinced that nuclear energy has a smaller environmental footprint.
Manuel_D 4y ago
The sum total of the waste produced by nuclear power generation in the US occupies a volume the footprint of a football field and 10 yards high [1]. The "infrastructure" it requires is concrete cylinders that are perfectly safe to stand next to [2]. The amount of waste it produces is miniscule relative to the amount of power it produces. And most importantly, this waste is contained rather than released out into the atmosphere like greenhouse gases. 1. https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-nuclear-fuel https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-... 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_cask_storage#/media/File:Nuclear_dry_storage.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_cask_storage#/media/File:N...
ClumsyPilot 4y ago
Even manure from a pig farm requires infrastructure and expertise to be handled, thats how you get ocean dead zones where everything except jellyfish suffocates
cesarb 4y ago
> How can it be called "clean" when it produces toxic waste that requires its own infrastructure and expertise to be handled. That's always been a paradox with nuclear power. On one hand, of all electric power generation technologies, nuclear power has the most toxic waste; on the other hand, that toxic waste is completely contained under normal operation, so that looking from the outside, it's one of the cleanest. That's why in these discussions you always have people talking past each other: depending on how you look at it, nuclear power can be very clean or very dirty.

How can it be called "clean" when it produces toxic waste that requires its own infrastructure and expertise to be handled. I think you meant "co2-emission-free-while-operating"

adrianN 4y ago

Nothing humans do is "clean", so you always have to read the word in context. In the sixties the alternative would've been coal which in comparison is less clean.

VyperCard 4y ago
It’s still euphemistic and you know it.
- adrianN 4y ago
  I don't think so. What would be "clean" energy for you? Renewables also take considerable resources to build. I assume you weigh nuclear waste very heavily, but I don't believe it to be such a serious problem. There is not that much highly radioactive waste being produced. I prefer renewables over nuclear because I think that in the end they'll be cheaper while being okay for the environment. But I would be very easily convinced that nuclear energy has a smaller environmental footprint.

Manuel_D 4y ago

The sum total of the waste produced by nuclear power generation in the US occupies a volume the footprint of a football field and 10 yards high [1]. The "infrastructure" it requires is concrete cylinders that are perfectly safe to stand next to [2]. The amount of waste it produces is miniscule relative to the amount of power it produces. And most importantly, this waste is contained rather than released out into the atmosphere like greenhouse gases. 1. https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-nuclear-fuel https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-... 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_cask_storage#/media/File:Nuclear_dry_storage.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_cask_storage#/media/File:N...

ClumsyPilot 4y ago

Even manure from a pig farm requires infrastructure and expertise to be handled, thats how you get ocean dead zones where everything except jellyfish suffocates

cesarb 4y ago

> How can it be called "clean" when it produces toxic waste that requires its own infrastructure and expertise to be handled. That's always been a paradox with nuclear power. On one hand, of all electric power generation technologies, nuclear power has the most toxic waste; on the other hand, that toxic waste is completely contained under normal operation, so that looking from the outside, it's one of the cleanest. That's why in these discussions you always have people talking past each other: depending on how you look at it, nuclear power can be very clean or very dirty.