3 ms·

A counterintuitive alternative is to invest a fraction of the costs of nuclear in cleaning up emissions from coal plants. We seem to have swung too far by shutt

A counterintuitive alternative is to invest a fraction of the costs of nuclear in cleaning up emissions from coal plants. We seem to have swung too far by shutting down a reliable source of energy when mitigating technologies to filter emissions [1] and next generation cleaner extraction technologies [2] are coming online to massively improve coal driven electric power generation. These technologies are DoE funded and patented the former has been deployed in production at a 100 Mw plant the latter is at a pilot stage in a 30Mw research generator at a university. In any case coal is not going away and there is no single “answer” to the planet’s energy needs. A resilient grid requires a portfolio of energy sources including nuclear but it’s by no means the single answer as the title of the post suggests. Uranium is “carbon free” but “radioactive waste full” and creates multigenerational environmental debt in the form of waste - nuke proponents usually hand wave and talk in generalities when it comes to this topic. Note the comment that “90% of materials in a nuclear reactor can be recycled” deftly sidestepping the 10% that will live on in deadly form for thousands of years with no solution in sight. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3568623/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3568623/ Google “Biswas Washington University Enhanced Electrostatic Precipitation” for more [2] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3817794 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3817794 Google “Axelbaum Washington University staged pressurized oxy combustion” for more

llsf 3y ago
The radioactive waste is fairly small. US is the country in the world with the most nuclear power plants. US produces yearly: " The amount is roughly equivalent to less than half the volume of an Olympic-sized swimming pool" source: https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-nuclear-fuel https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-... "More than 90% of its potential energy still remains in the fuel, even after five years of operation in a reactor. The United States does not currently recycle spent nuclear fuel but foreign countries, such as France, do." But even if like US does (i.e. does not re-use the waste), less than half of olympic pool is pretty small given the amount of energy produced. Ideally US would re-use the waste, and vitrified the final waste, and then producing even less volume of waste. Then store it. Properly packed it is not "in deadly form for thousands of years with no solution in sight". Most countries store it deep for 50 years, and then it is safe to dispose on near-surface disposal at ground level, or in caverns below ground level. Radioactivity is everywhere e.g. with radon (https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-12/documents/radon-zones-map.pdf https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-12/documents/ra...) at 4 pCi/L 7 our 1000 people will develop lung cancer. Flight attendants get their fair share too. Our body is prepared to fix itself when attacked by radiation. https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/ https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/

llsf 3y ago

The radioactive waste is fairly small. US is the country in the world with the most nuclear power plants. US produces yearly: " The amount is roughly equivalent to less than half the volume of an Olympic-sized swimming pool" source: https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-nuclear-fuel https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-... "More than 90% of its potential energy still remains in the fuel, even after five years of operation in a reactor. The United States does not currently recycle spent nuclear fuel but foreign countries, such as France, do." But even if like US does (i.e. does not re-use the waste), less than half of olympic pool is pretty small given the amount of energy produced. Ideally US would re-use the waste, and vitrified the final waste, and then producing even less volume of waste. Then store it. Properly packed it is not "in deadly form for thousands of years with no solution in sight". Most countries store it deep for 50 years, and then it is safe to dispose on near-surface disposal at ground level, or in caverns below ground level. Radioactivity is everywhere e.g. with radon (https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-12/documents/radon-zones-map.pdf https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-12/documents/ra...) at 4 pCi/L 7 our 1000 people will develop lung cancer. Flight attendants get their fair share too. Our body is prepared to fix itself when attacked by radiation. https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/ https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/