3 ms·
In my opinion, they aren't an eyesore. I quite like them. I appreciate the engineering. But that's a matter of personal preference. I agree: Nuclear is better.
by _griw 4y ago
In my opinion, they aren't an eyesore. I quite like them. I appreciate the engineering. But that's a matter of personal preference.
I agree: Nuclear is better. Had we ignored the hippies and NIMBYs 40 years ago and just gotten on with it, we would have a whole lot less problems. Had we done the same 20, 10, 5 years ago things would be a lot better. If we got them to shut up and listen now we would have a long term solution.
Unfortunately, with the way our governments are setup, large scale nuclear that is able to lower costs is simply not viable. Politicians look out for themselves, not long term national interest. The people have a visceral negative reaction that we aren't changing any time soon. Also, we can only really trust nuclear with certain countries. How many "civilian nuclear programs" have actually been for enrichment?
In an ideal world, we would run everything on nuclear. But our world is messy and imperfect. Wind turbines are a improvement in coal/gas, at least until a certain point where the instability is no longer worth it.
Those of us who care about energy security, climate change, and practicality need to advocate for nuclear. But its unlikely the pro-nuclear side will succeed. It has a fossil fuel lobby, renewable lobby, and an easily-scared, highly-emotional electorate to overcome.
Renewable energy - wind, solar, etc - are imperfect, but they're also a lot easier to get built. There's no need to push against wind and solar when we should be advocating for nuclear.
- tomohawk 4y agoIt's not a matter of personal preference. They put these thing away from most people for a reason. If they put them in cities or suburbs, a lot of people would complain and put an end to them. Siting them in rural areas - who cares if some people in flyover country complain about the incessent noise or the ruined landscapes? Don't believe me about the noise? Get a tent and try camping under one for a few days. For someone living in the mountains, putting windmills atop all the mountains makes the views strictly worse. For someone visiting the mountains, it looks novel and sci-fi.
- eldaisfish 4y agowhy on earth would you camp under a wind turbine? And how? Most are on private land with access control. Besides, once you're more than a few hundred meters away, you can barely hear them. Don't believe me - please look up the sound power numbers of modern wind turbines and see how close you need to be to hear them.
- tomohawk 4y agoA few hundred feet away you can hear them very clearly. They emit a lot of sound on low frequencies that travels right through walls. The sound is very disturbing to animals.
- ncmncm 4y agoNuclear is, in fact, not better. Nukes cost way more to operate, and phenomenally more to build, and take forever to build. I do not want to pay extra for somebody's nuke fetish. I want my carbon-neutral power cheap and plentiful, not dear and niggardly. So, give me wind, solar, tidal, geo. And, tear down dams to restore fisheries after enough of those are running. Maybe turn off remaining dams during smolting season.