• lemonhead2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    5 days ago

    why is there such a negative sentiment towards nuclear power? was it all oil and gas propaganda? or is there some truth

    • fullsquare@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      5 days ago

      the man who decided to end german nuclear power production getting a seat in gazprom doesn’t inspire confidence in reality-based discussion of this subject

    • CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      5 days ago

      Chernobyl, Fukushima, 3 Mile Island. Plus uranium is another non-renewable resource.

      I’m still pro nuke as getting off fossil fuels is of the utmost urgency, but we will have to learn to live off wind and solar.

        • LeFrog@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          Ah yes, the Fusion Reactors that are coming soon ™ (promised decades ago).

          We need energy now, not at some unknown point in the future. Of course, resaeching this technology may make sense. But it does not help today and also not the next 20 years.

          • DahGangalang@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            5 days ago

            Yeah, putting your hopes / goals on a fusion powered future is foolish at this point.

            But I def support (lots of) research into it.

              • hayvan@piefed.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                5 days ago

                Deskto pLinux is here, and it’s fine. I wish it was more popular but that doesn’t stop me from doing all my development, video editing, music , gaming on Linux.

      • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        So what has released more uncontrolled waste into the world, all the nukes including those, or the equivalent mega-wattage of all other human power generation? Our entire global community is FUCKED to the tune of hundreds of trillions of dollars from consequences of petro, while meanwhile very few of us are suffering from the effects of nuclear power generation. Nukes don’t replace solar and wind, they complement them.

        • kibiz0r@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          The question was “why is public sentiment so against nuclear?” and they answered, with a note that they personally support it over fossil fuels.

      • Courtney (she/her/they) @lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        I’d love to see a full production chain breakdown of disasters and their costs to clean up, for both fossil fuel and nuclear.

        Most people’s issue is “ooh scary radiation!” without realizing you get more exposure to ionizing radiation by living near a coal fired power plant than a nuclear one. Fuck, you can take a swim in the reactor pool and if you’re under the surface away from the nuclear material, the water above you blocks the background radiation you’d be exposed to walking around on the surface.

    • Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 days ago

      Honestly I think renewables are at a place where it doesnt really matter much anymore. My perception has been that its propaganda, but I’m not really knowledgeable on the subject

    • danielfm123@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      5 days ago

      There are new kinds of nuclear power plants based on safe Torum instead of uranium, Torum is more abundant, easy to manipulate and “non explosive” china has many reactors with this technology, meanwhile people in the west world is still deciding their gender.

    • einfach_orangensaft@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      32
      ·
      5 days ago

      Because it only makes sense if you also need to run nuclear Submarines with ICBMs on them.

      Basically Nuclear power has always been a military project thats just “Dual use” to offset the cost by having tax payers foot the bill for civilians plants.

      Doing that makes the whole supply chain cheaper for the Military usage…cuz mining it only for military usage only would be hella expensive and harder to justify towards the population.

      • Bashnagdul@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        This is only for uranium and plutonium based nuclear power. There are others that don’t produce weapons grade byproducts. Helium 3 for instance and other versions of uranium. Also cobalt is an option.

        As long as we want to pay for power, it can be profitable, in the sense that we pay what we need and people who work there are paid fairly as well.