• Gerprimus
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    6 months ago

    Nothing about nuclear energy production is good, sensible and safe! You are dependent on a finite resource, you have to put in an incredible amount of effort to keep it running. Not to mention the damage caused by a malfunction (see Fukushima and Chernobyl).

    • jaschen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      What are you even talking about?!?! There is so much uranium in the world. Even if we completely switched over to nuclear power and without improvements in Nuclear tech, our sun would have fizzled out and we still would have uranium left.

      Uranium is more abundant than silver and we don’t need much to power a nuclear reactor.

      I like how people take Fukushima and Chernobyl as examples for disasters. Please go look up how many people have died from those disasters. Please go check. I’ll wait.

      Chernobyl: 2 Fukushima: 0

      Keep in mind that Chernobyl was built in the 50s with 50s tech it never maintained during the USSR era.

      Fukushima did not anticipate a tsunami. Because of the Fukushima disaster we know have new protocols to improve future nuclear builds. If anything Fukushima is a prime example how safe a nuclear reactor can be even when the worst scenario happens.

      • EunieIsTheBus@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        I like how people take Fukushima and Chernobyl as examples for disasters. Please go look up how many people have died from those disasters. Please go check. I’ll wait. Chernobyl: 2 Fukushima: 0

        Are you really that dillusional that you think that the only casualties are the people who died in the incident? Hundreds of peoples suffered from cancer and other long term effects alone in chernobyl. The area is still hazardous to people (as some ‘clever’ Russian invaders just proofed two years ago)

        Please go check. I’ll wait.

        PlEaSe Go ChEcK. I’lL wAiT.

        Please just grow up, kiddo

      • Gerprimus
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        What are you even talking about?!?! There is so much uranium in the world. Even if we completely switched over to nuclear power and without improvements in Nuclear tech, our sun would have fizzled out and we still would have uranium left. Uranium is more abundant than silver and we don’t need much to power a nuclear reactor.

        And yet we would still be dependent on an industry, just as we are today on coal, gas and oil.

        I like how people take Fukushima and Chernobyl as examples for disasters. Please go look up how many people have died from those disasters. Please go check. I’ll wait.

        As others have already answered: far more people died than you claim here! How much land was made uninhabitable for centuries? How many animals would have to die? How much food would have to be destroyed because it was contaminated? What happens if a tsunami hits an offshore wind farm? They collapse… And then? Do they have to be rebuilt?But you can do that because the land has not been contaminated

      • sandbox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        There is so much uranium in the world. Even if we completely switched over to nuclear power and without improvements in Nuclear tech, our sun would have fizzled out and we still would have uranium left.

        TL;DR: If we switched over to nuclear, we’d burn through the world’s reserves of accessible uranium ore in less than twenty years. Hopefully the sun will last a bit longer than that.

        According to 2022 Red Book, there are around 8 million tonnes of Uranium which we could extract for $260 or less, per kg. The current price for uranium is around half that, FYI, so nuclear fuel prices would have at least doubled by the point we’re extracting that last million tonne.

        Nuclear power plants use around 20 tonnes of uranium per TWh, according to the world nuclear association, and world energy consumption is around 25,000 TWh per year, according to the IEA. That would be half a million tonnes of uranium consumed per year. Meaning we would burn through the world’s reserve of reasonably accessible uranium in just sixteen years.

      • Gerprimus
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Furthermore, any energy production that has the potential to injure, harm or kill thousands of people cannot be considered safe. Just because nothing has happened so far.