'Every euro invested in nuclear power makes the climate crisis worse' - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Pollution, global warming, urbanisation etc.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15161832
@AFAIK, how do you expect a fledgling industry to compete against a giant nuclear complex that's been state-sponsored with untold billions since the war?

Every new technology needs sponsoring private and/or public to succeed. The fact that you turn a blind eye to the massive subsidies that went into nuclear both military and civil while griping about the peanuts put into sponsoring renewable energy clearly exposes your bias.

As I said, I don't support battery technology, unless it can be recycled.

Volkswagen Will Use Hydrometallurgy To Recycle 95 Percent Of A Cell

And why would countries with rare minerals not want to sell them? Do you regret that the British Empire is no longer in a position to monopolize the resources of the planet?

Amazing how you manage to ignore the elephant in the room. The link between imperialism and nuclear, both military and civil, is blindingly obvious.
#15161871
- It's not the subsidies I oppose it's the fact that they didn't deliver. Solar investments in California have exposed a host of new problems that must be solved with yet more investment and subsidy, whilst burning gas for decades longer than necessary.

- The damage resource extraction causes are well documented. Bolivia is very reluctant to become the next Niger delta.

- Other than wanting to secure uranium supplies I'm not familiar with any imperial links.

@BeesKnee5 Thanks for sharing. Those numbers sound much more manageable but how can something have over 100% efficiency?
#15161888
What a crazy thread. Why are people picking sides when the solution will be both (until Fusion comes along). Nuclear power produces so much more energy than green technology - and except for the waste which usually stays on site, is completely environmentally green. So these plants will always be the national backup plan for the shortfall of energy that renewable technology cannot produce whilst the global national strategy is to make their nation carbon neutral. We might see hydrogen plants in the future although I suspect hydrogen will be what replaces oil.

To be honest, I am not against a Manhattan type Project in hydrogen power especially as I am sure we could remove our dependence from oil in a decade of we did. Nor am I against more wind or solar plants. But to say we shouldn't be investing in nuclear power (which is a green technology to everyone but the obtuse) when nothing comes close to it for power generation or will come close to it whilst we only have solar, dams and wind, is ignoring that whilst nations have committed to Paris, they will have no other choice but to invest in Nuclear, whether they want to invest in it or not.
#15161890
B0ycey wrote:What a crazy thread. Why are people picking sides when the solution will be both (until Fusion comes along). Nuclear power produces so much more energy than green technology - and except for the waste which usually stays on site, is completely environmentally green. So these plants will always be the national backup plan for the shortfall of energy that renewable technology cannot produce whilst the global national strategy is to make their nation carbon neutral. We might see hydrogen plants in the future although I suspect hydrogen will be what replaces oil.

To be honest, I am not against a Manhattan type Project in hydrogen power especially as I am sure we could remove our dependence from oil in a decade of we did. Nor am I against more wind or solar plants. But to say we shouldn't be investing in nuclear power (which is a green technology to everyone but the obtuse) when nothing comes close to it for power generation or will come close to it whilst we only have solar, dams and wind, is ignoring that whilst nations have committed to Paris, they will have no other choice but to invest in Nuclear, whether they want to invest in it or not.



If we make a lot of electric cars, we're going to need a lot of electricity. We also need dependable surge capacity for weather extremes that will keep getting more extreme.
#15161896
AFAIK wrote:- Other than wanting to secure uranium supplies I'm not familiar with any imperial links.


Today, there is no imperialism without nuclear. From the very beginning, nuclear technology for military and civil applications was solely developed in the interest of the global hegemonic ambitions of the imperial powers. That hasn't changed one little bit in the last 80 years as is clear from the Iran crisis. The US is trying to deny Iran nuclear energy because it is closely linked to nuclear weapons.

All major powers with an imperial ambitions (US, Russia, China, UK, France, etc.) have a nuclear weapons program. Despite catastrophic state finances, post-Brexit UK is even planning to substantially increase its nuclear arsenal to expand it geopolitical reach in the Far East.

Only people totally in denial of reality will deny the close link between military and civil applications of nuclear technology.

Moreover, the nuclear non-proliferation treaty makes sure that countries without nuclear weapons come under the control of the nuclear powers if they want nuclear energy. But even without that, it is obvious that only the big powers have the means to develop and control nuclear energy. That is not a technology easily developed or build by countries like Zimbabwe or Cambodia without the support and approval of the nuclear powers. That leaves most countries at the mercy of the imperial powers.

No wonder the imperialists oppose the roll-out of cheap and safe renewable energy that can be controlled by each country, by each region and even by each commune or homestead. It's all about imperial control and nothing else. They have been pulling the woollies over your eyes.
#15161898
late wrote:If we make a lot of electric cars, we're going to need a lot of electricity. We also need dependable surge capacity for weather extremes that will keep getting more extreme.


Nuclear power is all about abundance. Trying to link it to imperialism is so off the mark it is unreal. I can't speak for America but the UK is placing windmills anywhere it can including the North Sea. Hydro power, yep doing that too. And solar panels are an initiative for home owners which is amazing considering we don't have the weather. Investing in Hinckley isn't even a strategic move. You can claim that you get more watts per €£$ by other means which is true I guess but you can get more watts per €£$ by placing a turbine on a hamster wheel than spending in on a windmill but that is still ignoring the major issue which is that you cannot generate the watts needed for society at a whole.

So why are we doing it? Why are we taking Chinese money on a longplay? Because of the abundance of energy this plant creates for when other plants are decommissioned. Windmills and solar panels everywhere might seem logical but it isn't possible. So nuclear isn't going anywhere until fusion turns up. Claiming otherwise is ignoring the elephant in the room. Nobody wants nuclear power. It isn't even a vote winner. But I suspect people would rather have the lights on so that is how it is. :hmm:
#15161930
AFAIK wrote:Thanks for sharing. Those numbers sound much more manageable but how can something have over 100% efficiency?


Heat pumps do not actually heat the water, they pump water underground where it is warmer and then extract the heat through compression, imagine a fridge in reverse (The house is warmed by the compression, while the cold air\water is pumped into the ground where it is warmed again). This enables far more energy to be obtained, for every 1KW of energy used a ground source heat pump extracts 3-4KW from the incoming water.
#15165698
B0ycey wrote:
What a crazy thread. Why are people picking sides when the solution will be both...



Exactly.

If you put together an actual plan to zero out carbon, it's going to have nuclear power in it. Eventually that will be replaced with something better, but at the moment wishful thinking just doesn't cut it.
Russia-Ukraine War 2022

ISIS wants to create a division between Chechens […]

PoFo would be a strange place for them to focus o[…]

In my opinion, masculinity has declined for all o[…]

@ingliz good to know, so why have double standar[…]