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")
e-pale/pal
Blessed by zozbot on 15/1/2022
pizzashill 2yr ago#1604364
spent 0 currency on pings
The anti-nuclear loons have def shut down plants, my only point is most plants in America shut down due to economic reasons.
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 disagree.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
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
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context