https://rdrama.net/post/54628/ice-cold/1603734?context=8#context
This entire argument is a framework for beating the shit out of this brand of rightoid.
"What about the nuclear" rightoid dunked: a template for shutting these r-slurs down
- 93
- 7
Top Poster of the Day:
kaamrev
Current Registered Users: 25,747
BROWSE EFFORTPOSTS
SITE GUIDE
HOLES
PING GROUPS
Live commit: 3d76758
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I disagree.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
based
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Hey
@pizzashill how do you feel about this one?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwentendorf_Nuclear_Power_Plant
Or this one?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoreham_Nuclear_Power_Plant
Just trying to get a feel for how much you'd attribute nuclear energy's failure to the anti-nuclear movement in general. (In the latter case notice the name "Mario Cuomo")
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I was only talking about America.
The anti-nuclear loons have def shut down plants, my only point is most plants in America shut down due to economic reasons.
My bigger point is the GOP is not "pro nuclear" and dems are not why we do not really build more plants.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Do you think the efforts of anti-nuclear groups are restricted to their ability to completely shut down reactors through protest, and that they have no capacity to either increase the cost of nuclear energy or decrease the cost of other sources of energy production?
We could argue that, for example, the requirement for nuclear power stations to put aside a fraction of their income to a nuclear waste fund and/or decommissioning is reasonable, but the absence of such requirements for other sources of energy (there is no fund for recycling wind turbines & solar panels in the US) seem imbalanced (like letting fossil fuel-powered plants blast combustion products into the air).
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I'm sure they have, nobody is saying we couldn't make nuclear plants easier to build.
But by far, by far the largest factor is other energy sources being cheaper.
Even China, a fairly pro nuclear country started moving away from nuclear energy:
https://www.technologyreview.com/2018/12/12/138271/chinas-losing-its-taste-for-nuclear-power-thats-bad-news/
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Imagine citing china as an argument. You really are as dumb as everyone says you are.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The irony of this comment is staggering.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
If chinks started walking off bridges, you'd do it, too? Calm the frick down, piglet, get pooh's peepee outta your mouth.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
they are shut down due to socioeconomic reasons
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Because of regulation passed by the government lobbied for by fossil fuel companies
Wake me up when there's a point I have to turn my brain on for
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You don't actually understand what the argument was over.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I went off the post title, and if its a bad post title that's not my problem
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
"What about the nuclear" is a performative argument rightoids make that suggests "the liberals" are why we don't build new plants.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I agree that argument is dumb because both republicans and democrats are beholden to the same corpoate interests, in this case fossil fuel companies
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Ya nobody disagrees, my only point is republicans are not pro nuclear and the only reason they invoke it is to pretend it's actually the liberals holding nuclear back.
Republican policy around nuclear is actually more hostile to nuclear energy.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
As a demographic Republican voters have been historically been less hostile towards nuclear energy. Even as recent as 2019:
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Republican voters but republican policy is more hostile, just not in a direct way.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It doesn't get any real support from either party, but the Democratic party has historically opposed nuclear energy, including cancelling the breeder program. They've only recently changed position on it in the last two years.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Read that sentence back to yourself and try to come back with something actually coherent.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Pizza has been btfo so many times, I lost count.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
What was I wrong about?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Outside of even repub policy the only reason rightoids give a shit about nuclear is cuz they think its a way to act like theyre above leftoids when it comes to renewables. If their dreams of no more green energy came to pass theyd double down on how great oil is rather than ever suggest build a new nuke plant.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
No, for a lot of people it's because intermittent renewables suck butt and nuclear energy actually works. France built out a huge reactor fleet for energy independence in the late 70's. They didn't even care about air pollution or CO2. Germany built out wind & solar to 'go green' and their grid is super expensive, they're dependent on Russian gas to back it up, and their average emissions are still super high.
https://app.electricitymap.org/map
Germany's doing surprisingly well today.
The only countries that are even remotely low in lifecycle CO2 emissions are countries with a shitload of hydro and/or nuclear. (Or Iceland w/ geothermal, or a couple countries with a shitload of hydro that can use it as a massive battery w/ some wind or solar in geographically ideal locations).
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
It's not just that, it's quite a few different things including what
@pizzashill mentioned:
https://whatisnuclear.com/economics.html
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The link agrees with me
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yes, but it also mentions gas prices.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yes, excessive regulation prevents nuclear from being competitive with fracking
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It's not a simple topic, and this sort of depends on how much you value cheap energy vs. safety. If we want fossil fuels to be as safe and non-destructive to the environment as nuclear energy (as it currently is), it would probably become very uncompetitive compared to even current nuclear.
Of course fossil fuels are necessary for wind & solar to function, so that's not happening.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Nuclear is cheap, safe, reliable, better than basically everything else, ect. We just tacked on unnecessary regulation to make opening new plants de-facto impossible
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Nuclear is literally not cost competitive with fossil fuels.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yes, because of unnecessary regulation
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
You just want another chernoble, which is exactly what putin wants
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Communists misusing something is just communists being r-slurred as usual.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Amazing
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
5.99
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
our local energy company jacked our rates up for a decade to add another reactor to our plant only to back out and have it be one of the biggest scandals in the states recent history, westinghouse high ups were arrested and everything pretty neat shit, they said they would pay us back but you can probably guess how that went.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nukegate_scandal
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Check out Site C dam in BC if you want to see an even worse power generation-related debacle. This kind of thing isn't exclusive to NPP construction projects. The AP-1000's at Vogtle (similar to VC Summer) are also massively over-budget, but somehow the cost per MWh generated is still lower by some insane factor than that hydroelectric project.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
shit like that is so crazy, to think that back during the depression when the feds were creating lakes all across the southeast for hydro power and just completely ignored complaints about people who didnt want their towns to be underwater. my great grandfather was paid some hilariously small amount of money for 30 something acres of farmland and they all knew better than to complain.
i do be fishing at that lake tho
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Yeah, I'm not really up to date on what factors were involved there. IIRC it's some combination of inexperience and poor dam siting (but all the best locations for building hydro dams in the area are already taken anyway).
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
ME RIGHT NOW:
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
DARN OWNED!!!!!!!!
this thread was so fricking epic, take that Nazi rightoids
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
he missed my response
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
A wikipedia article not about America refutes my point how?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
A vox article refutes my point how?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It refuted it in literally every way, and is supported by research.
You didn't even know what pnas was.
What in the vox article is not factually correct?
You screenshotted a wiki article literally not about America in an argument over nuclear power in America.
You are either r-slurred or trolling.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
My wikipedia article refuted your argument literally everyway, and was supported by research.
I know what PNAS is, a random article in PNAS is an odd source as I doubt you have any understanding of how to even begin to read a scientific article.
What in my screenshot is not factually correct?
You sited Vox, it is not a reputable source for a middle schooler to be using
You absolutely are, unquestionably, r-slurred.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Your claim: american liberals are shutting down power plants.
Your source: a wiki article not about America.
How does this make sense in your head?
Literally fricking what? Do you read anything you type?
What in the vox article is not factually correct?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
well heres the article about liberals shutting down nuclear power plants in america, is was the third result not the first
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/02/why-is-california-closing-diablo-canyon-nuclear-plant.html
I'm not going to spend hours researching what is common sense
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Literally all of these plants are actually closing for economic reasons, the vast majority are.
https://www.amacad.org/publication/economic-future-nuclear-power
Notice how you aren't responding to anything said to you?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
this one thread has created nuclear meltdowns within you, pizza. you're pooping up /new/
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Why you so nervous that you do this, pizza?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I like making fun of rightoids here?
Like the guy screenshotted a wiki article not about america to claim "the dems are shutting down teh nuclear"
My argument isn't even that dems are pro nuclear, it's that the gop is even less so and nuclear is not competitive due to cheap fossil fuels.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
But I mean, like ... has anyone else made a hole to say, "This is for organizing against the leftoid menace?"
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
What am I supposed to do? Let hordes of r-slurred conservatives ruin the community?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Ruin it yourself instead, clearly.
Anyway...what did you have for dinner?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Ruin it by countering literal FB boomer talking points?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I ASKED WHAT YOU HAD FOR DINNER.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Not eaten yet?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I had leftover sweet and sour pork.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
I support nuclear power cuz i want another chernobyl, hopefully they cant ontain the next one
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
!blackjack300
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
!blackjack300
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
!blackjack400
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
I think you're both right
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You're wrong.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
About what?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
There's no way to think he's even slightly right.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Idk man it seems obvious that safety concerns play a big role in surpressing nuclear power, if nothing else, this would be a major cause of over-regulation
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
About thinking Pizza is right.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
It doesn't help at all when intermittent renewables drive down the price of electricity to negative values. An open-cycle gas turbine* can load-follow to fill in this intermittency much more easily than either coal or nuclear power generating stations, and the capital cost of such a gas plant is a lot lower than a nuclear power station, so the major fraction of cost is the gas itself. Cheap gas doesn't help at all, but highly unstable price in the electricity market thanks to intermittency is a major contributor to this problem.
Nuclear power stations also have the additional challenge of having to deal with a xenon-poisoned core if they operate at reduced power for too long, as well as a long ramp-up time if they're powered up from full shutdown.
*much worse for CO2 emissions, btw.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
I eventually grew to hate Samuel after I heard him having s*x with my sister. I arrived at the house one day, my mother being at work, and heard the sounds of Samuel plunging his peepee into my sisterβs vagina through her closed room door, along with my sisterβs moans. I stood there and listened to it all. So my sister, who was four years younger than me, managed to lose her virginity before I did. It reminded me of how pathetic I was, that at the age of twenty-two, I was still a virgin. I hated her boyfriend as well. My sister said that heβs been with other girls before her, and Iβm sure he lost his virginity at a much younger age. It is such an injustice. The slob doesnβt even have a car, and he is able to get girlfriends, while I drive a BMW and get no attention from any girls whatsoever.
Snapshots:
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context