Why Cant We All Get Along

I wish the countries leaders of the world would all get together and put an end to anything nuclear including energy plants. Nuclear energy is evil and it would be the best thing for the earth to STOP NUCLEAR ENERGY. Its crazy and dangerous and the possible pollution is devastation. OPPOSE NUCLEAR ENERGY. I can live without my tv and air conditioning. We can't live without a wholesome earth.

Top | New | Old

pdockal · 56-60, M

Nuclear is the greenest energy (i work on a plant) possible
Closing one plant typically means 4 fossil fuel plants just to make similar amount of energy

Yes there is always the possibility of an accident & there is the spent fuel

New plants can run on spent fuel from older plants

Reactors take up less land the wind farms and solar arrays for the same power creation

View 5 more replies »

pdockal · 56-60, M

@Penny

The US is recommisioning a nuclear plant that started decommissioning & is considering recommissioning one in NY that is being decommisioned

With AI & Data centers & pushing electric cars & cooktops we need nuclear

Wind isn't reliable
Solar is only part of the day
Hydro is good but it interferes with fish etc

No one type is perfect

Penny · 46-50, F

@pdockal i understand. thats one reason i dont like electric cars.

pdockal · 56-60, M

@Penny

They aren't green to build them anyway
Unless you charge them with solar your using fossil fuels to run them

MisterBander

It sounds like Nuclear Fusion is on the horizon. With that we can get rid of all Fission plants.
Fusion is apparently a lot safer if it can be contained and controlled.
I suppose one day Fusion could escape and turn Earth into a Sun, wouldn't that be a fun ride. Weeee.

Penny · 46-50, F

@MisterBander well, we do need to charge our phones n stuff lol

whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M

@MisterBander The physics of fission is terrifying. I wont go there. But imagine the sun suddenly blowing up in your back yard😷

Elessar · 31-35, M

Turning off nuclear means relying more on fossil. Which means more pollution, more severe global warming, more wars and more radiations too (as a coal plant operating normally emits more radioactive particles than an NPP of equal output will in its entire lifetime)

Penny · 46-50, F

@Elessar well, maybe leave the operational plants unitl a better source is found but no new ones

Elessar · 31-35, M

@Penny They're insufficient and global warming is already a ticking bomb. Renewables cannot entirely replace fossils (as their output isn't constant) and a shortage of oil caused by the umpteenth war in the middle east will cause a major economic collapse if not even literal famine (wait 'till diesel shortages start hitting agriculture, combined with climate change).

We're accepting a certain disaster (mass starvation, recession, supply chain disruptions) in fear of one that, even if you deliberately tried to provoke it, would have infinitesimal chances of happening (see how many things were deliberately done wrong by the Soviets at the time of Chernobyl, the list of blunders is almost comical if it wasn't tragic)

jackrabbit10 · M

lots of money in nuclear energy. when the money stops so will the nukes.

Northwest · M

We can decommission nuclear power/weapons, but only if the following happens:

1. World population is reduced to 1.5 Billion people.

2. United States, China, Russia, France, UK, India, Pakistan, North Korea, Israel agree to destroy their nuclear weapons and eliminate their armed forces, with exception of internal security (police).

3. Fully develop next generation, hybrid, modular fusion reactors.

Wholesome earth disappeared when the earth population exceeded 100 Million people. But 1,2 and 3 above, and especially 3, will go a long way toward making it wholesome in about 400 years.

View 4 more replies »

pdockal · 56-60, M

@Northwest

Then you didn't read & understand Penny's original post .... eliminate ALL nuclear including power plants ... actually it never mentions disarmament so ..........

Penny · 46-50, F

@pdockal i know i wasnt clear but my original intention was basically to suggest we give up nuclear weapons in the interest of peace like if everyone agreed to do it. i dont know what happenned lol. nuclear energy is dangerous. that is all lol

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

ArishMell · 70-79, M

I don't minimise the cost of building it and of dealing with the spent fuel etc., but nuclear power is actually far safer and cleaner than "fossil fuel"; and solar and wind power are by no means as "green" as made out although their "fuels" are free.

Nuclear weapons of course are a different matter and we can all wish they had never been invented.

Ultimately "we" will run out of petroleum and coal even if we don't stop using them by policy. Then what will "we" do?

whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M

Like all science, nuclear energy is neither good, nor bad. It is the uses it is put to by people that decide the good or bad. People are the problem..Maybe the cockroaches will do better when their turn comes...😷

Add a comment...