I worked at the Millstone Reactor at Niantic CT Built by Halibuton Brown and Root , Dick Cheney's Corp . Glowed green at Night . I wore a Dosimeter Badge , down the Road developed 4 forms of Cancer . Wouldn't recommend that you work at a Nuclear Plant site .
My City invested in Palo Verde in AZ while it was being built. They are running out of water from Colorado River. WTF are they going to use when they have to cool down the bars after they've been spent?
This would be something id be in favor of if it wasnt being driven by AI, crypto, and these tech companies specifically. I dont trust Google to work with the best, safest companies tbh.
Saying nuclear doesn't count as carbon-free energy because its supply chain is not carbon-free seems ... intentionally obtuse. Thats why its called a "transition." The first solar panel was not built using solar power. The first oil was not drilled using oil. The first steam engine was not made possible by steam power. The first coal was not mined using coal. The first tools were built without tools. The first fire was built without fire. ... what's your point?
Yes, in general, I observe very few in the activism space speaking realistically when it comes to energy technology. The raw materials for the first solar panel were mined using fossil fuels, and they will be for the foreseeable future. Same goes for batteries. The mining alone, e.g., for copper, requires sifting through tons of rock just to get a relatively small amount of the desired material. It is energy intensive and wasteful. Production of renewable devices also affects the environment in places such as China, South America, and Africa. To compare the different energy sources in a fair manner w.r.t. environmental impact is a major technical challenge. I get the impression that nuclear is in this regard a net improvement over renewables. But I'm not certain. What I am certain of is that I can safely disregard most of what is being claimed regarding energy production.
You want to study the effects of Uranium/depleted Uranium look at the US Military troops that served in the Iraq war and the civilians in Iraq who were all exposed to depleted Uranium by the US Military.
The level of greed is astonishing today… no cure for that. .Dorothy Parker wrote a poem entitled The Flaw in Paganism , “Drink and dance, laugh and lie, love the reeling midnight through for tomorrow we shall die, (but alas we never do.”) seems fitting.
Lol! Tell that to the global warming alarmists who use private jets to fly around the world eating the finest foods as they tell us we need to own nothing and eat bugs
This doesn’t even address the issue of nuclear waste which is substantial to say the least! We don’t want to solve one problem just to create a new one! Besides, as was pointed out, the enrichment process needed to make uranium usable requires energy to operate the centrifuge which has to come from somewhere; usually a fossil fuel burning generation plant. It’s an absurd path to choose when the earth itself is brimming with geothermal energy!
HYDROGEN ECONOMY, GEOTHERMAL ENERGY & OCEAN THERMAL ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATION is the only alternative today to fight economic crisis & energy crisis.
building nuclear power plant is not green and you have to build lots of them, it is said that doubling the nuclear power plant we have right now will only contribute to 4% in less gaz emission. we need to slow down and start to produce better and lasting product. but no one are saying that. remember the gaz emission effect on climate of today is from 30 years ago emissions. So we are in deep deep trouble since no one has slow down yet.
What are you talking about? Nuclear energy is already 18% of power generation, doubling would be 36%. And it's not green, but it's easily the greenest thing we have that can actually power our world
@@aronm5329 According to scenarios from the World Nuclear Association and the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (both nuclear lobby organisations), doubling the capacity of nuclear power worldwide in 2050 would only decrease greenhouse gas emissions by around 4%. But in order to do that, the world would need to bring 37 new large nuclear reactors to the grid every year from now, year on year, until 2050.
@@jeanyvestheriault8362 OMG that's in 2050 and worldwide energy is expected to go up by as much as 101% by then. To double our overall energy and still decrease co2 emissions by 4% is freakin' phenomenal! You kind of just proved my point. If we 4x our solar and wind, and supplement the remainder with coal, we would increase co2 emissions by over 80% of current levels. What would be your solution?
Nuclear engineer here. This is a terrible idea and will not end well.
3 ชั่วโมงที่ผ่านมา +1
SMRs don't scale down well, can't just be situated anywhere especially not in risky places like the flood plains of Houston where they let people build homes, would need constant security and competent monitoring and maintenance, the NRC has to approve them, they have to buy sufficient insurance which is a deal-breaker in its own right, they need massive capital investment, they take years to build, finding and training enough plant staff will also be very challenging (and doesn't scale well with SMRs), and people won't want them in their communities with near rabid-level objection. The cryptobros just what the shiny pretty unobtanium tech like flying cars to privatize the profits and socialize the externalities like costs and risks. I suggest a book _50 Years in Nuclear Power: A Retrospective_ by S. Levy formerly of GE. Our computer names were all named after The Simpsons' characters. 😅
Aliens use small Ion- Thorium Reactors on the Ship that crashed at Roswell. My dad was an Air Force intelligence Officer at Wright Patterson when the Debris and 4 Beings arrived there . 👽👽👽👽 One was alive for 4 Days . 4 Saucers circled White Sands Missile Range that Day . They aimed a Radar array at the last one and it came down . There's a lot more to the Story .
Yeah, that's also my take on it. Anti-nuclear activists are often incredibly misguided on the actual dangers of nuclear plants. Imo they're a great backbone for an energy grid that also relies on wind/solar/hydro. Having them power AI and crypto is a shame though.
Why do you have someone on claiming that nuclear is not carbon free? This is such a bad faith argument. All power sources take energy to build and setup so the same thing could be said of wind/solar. Nuclear plants have a higher energy density than wind and solar farms. Idk why this person is arguing about land use when this is the case. You need to have people on who have not been biased against nuclear for decades already.
Putting cryptocurrency (specifically currencies that require lots of compute) tech alongside training and use of Large language Models use for AI is a very misleading coupling of two totally different uses of energy. LLMs are use for things like translation and learning which helps enhance understanding and communication among people including those who are misinformed or uniformed about energy challenges of the world. Cryptocurrencies that require tons of compute in the other hand are in no way essential or necessary for anything that advances humanity.
Deregulation is definitely a worry, but current safety standards are good. Sure, nuclear energy has carbon emissions in its supply chains, but so does solar & wind. The regulations on the nuclear energy industry mean that it's actually far less wasteful than what solar and wind will be (when their life cycle ends). No doubt there's issues relating to indigenous people and child/forced labour, but that's a general issue of global capitalism & mining companies. Metals needed for solar & wind have some really awful supply chains, such as the DRC. The largest ranium source Kazak, which I struggle to find much info on, so its likely injustices happening. But no doubt Canada and Australia (sure there are awful indigenous issues with land use in oz) will have far better mining/labour practices than the countries cobalt/nickel is sourced from. One more thing that wasn't mentioned is that we need baseload power! If tech companies don't have nuclear to supply their demand 24/7, they won't be using renewable & battery tech. It'll be mostly gas, as is the case now!
@Curt-Gevert Everyone is investing in Zuckerberg and Musk , funny how that works. Politics mixed with the Entrepreneurial . But is there Oil , or Rice , in Space , I'd love to find out , Trump and Musk should be the first Visitors to Mars with a Live Stream . They can dance to YMCA 🎵🎶🤣
Nuclear is greener than any fossil fuel and is more reliable. Let's keep the nuclear industry on its toes with ever-increasing safety, but not get distracted by a misguided total distrust of it. It's worth noting even some of Chernobyl was still running in the year 2000.
Totally, Matt. And Chernobyl area is mostly clean of radiation etc. Fear porn is what is used against the SAFEST energy (nuclear) ever devised by men. Lowest number of casualties in entire energy sector. Coal killed millions, oil/gas killed hundreds of thousands, hydro took huge swaths of land away. These are abundant and okay, mind you, but those are the costs. Green energy IS NOT green.
Chernobol was a graphite moderated, water cooled, RBMK reactor. The design of Soviet reactors like that were flawed from the start, but the socialist system didn't allow for dissent. Further, the people running the reactor failed to follow their own protocols, related to socialism. The same kind of socialist system most of these people want implemented. Modern reactors are extremely safe.
@Curt-Gevert Quite right, Curt. I retired from power engineering 10 years ago but am well read on the topic. Generation III and generation IV reactors are superbly safe, and have very little dangerous waste. Frederik Pohl's 1987 novel "Chernobyl" has a lot of actual info in it. People should read up on this.
Renewables are always a misnomer. They should be called more slowly terminals. All energy requires limited resources. If we want our society to last millenia instead of centuries, we need to move away from Nuclear, Hydro, even Wind and Solar, and simply use less. All non-safetynet usage of energy should be massively taxed, and profiteering from things like Crypto investing should be taxed a magnitude more than that. School Children should be taught that the term "renewable" was a giant lie made by financial feudalists to shore up and preserve their power in the same breadth they are taught that all clergyment are con artists.
But isn't nuclear now safer with all of our new technology it's nothing like the old just asking? As according to research it can now be recycled today almost 90% of it is recycled
Leona Morgan's comments about the realities for Native communities is excellent. We still have 600 superfund sites of toxic and hazardous chemicals from WWII in the Northern Hemisphere. Dialog and sharing are so vital going forward.
I don't understand the push for Nuclear Power Plants when we are full aware of its dangers . This is unacceptable & I am very surprise these at E Commerce & Big TEC investing in this .
The activists worried about mining and cleanup for nuclear are honestly heroes. As much as the power plant is great (imho), the externalities need to be addressed as with any industry. I hope people who agree also worry about how much (more) radiation is released from the coal industry (as a specific concern, not just the blanket term "pollution").
As crazy as it sounds, they may have the ability to transform the energy sector away from fossil fuels with this move. Nuclear is indeed greener than solar when mining, manufacturing and maintenance costs are included. Nuclear power also spreads less radioactive waste into the environment, that honor goes to coal with natural gas from fracking coming in second. Because the radioactive isotopes are what are desired, mining for fuel for nuclear power in fact removes radioactive material from the environment that was naturally there.
yeah might as well make nuclear waste in the pursuit of shit coins and anime porn why not?
3 ชั่วโมงที่ผ่านมา
Disclaimer: I worked in the nuclear industry with ex-GE Nuclear engineers. Nuclear is currently expensive, impractical, and inherently riskier than renewables plus storage. SMRs are also terror targets and multiply the number containment areas that must be guarded and audited. Surveying YT videos on this topic, there are zillions of sockpuppet/troll commenters that look like Russian bots with LLM-like language chat bots or boiler room humans expressing odd support without a grasp of native English with similar idiosyncrasies. It's within the realm of possibility that Elon or MAANG are trying to manufacture consent for a nuclear "resurgence", even if it's unworkable, uneconomical, and pointless now in most applications.
This rhetoric should be translated into language the average laymen can understand. We all know the average voter in the U.S. needs things explained simply and in a way that informs them of how this directly/indirectly impacts them. Democracy Now’s message is important and should be understood by all.
@kellywright5282 You realize that radioactive particles are released in the emissions of coal... Nuclear power plants don't regularly release any nuclear material it's all packaged into concrete and metal containers. There are some instances of nuclear material being released, but it's only in rare circumstances; in the same way that a car is more dangerous than flying even though flying can seem scarier.
There is a lot of energy waste in the U.S.. Same thing with water. We take too much for granted and forget how much effort, money, and other things were required to make these things. You have to be intelligent to create articial intelligence. Mankind has not displayed this ability yet.
Candus can use 90 % recycled radioactive material as fuel and have 7 layers of safety features. Although, I do think Bitcoin is ridiculous and when we become more energy efficient we find new ways of needing tons more energy.
And yet, Canadian reactors continually release tritium into the environment-aka the great lakes. Tritium is bio accumulated by mollusks which is amplified up trophic levels
I always wonder what the carbon footprint is for these climate conferences. How many flights? How much infrastructure is built? Signs printed? Hotel laundry? Hotel energy? Lights, computers, tablets, phones, broadcast equipment, etc are used? Why are these meetings not held digitally?
Stop fear-mongering about nuclear power! We're never going to get people to use less energy. That is not going to happen. Let's focus on getting good regulations in place, and do it right!
Amy what a significant DEMOCRACY NOW that begins to illustrate the high tech aspect and the voices of native realities and a nuclear energy information resource service.
UN , Indigenous Climate Actions, New Zealand march to protest Founding document, Treaty of Wangi being taken away trough a bill.UN , Indigenous Climate Actions, New Zealand march to protest Founding document, Treaty of Wangi being taken away trough a bill.
$1,200 being added to every household in Australia brings the realities of change and how it effects people's pocketbooks illustrating macro and micro policy realities for decision making.
Will the magical “indigenous” people create the “green and clean” energy and study the health effects of whatever they deem is their issues? Because we can all sit back and let them fix it all with some Gaia mysticism and bright colors.
Besides the spent fuel, what happens to the plant itself at its end of life? Are the materials (concrete, metals, etc.) able to be recycled for future use? From what I’ve seen so far, they are either entombed in-place or buried somewhere else. Even the SMRs (small modular reactor) I’ve seen proposed are intended to be entombed in-place once they’re considered depleted or failed.
Nuclear is our best option. We should have been investing in a nuclear future for decades but let fear-mongering get the best of us and it has led to runaway carbon emissions and a greatly degraded environment.
Totally agree. The fallacy of the 'nuclear is too expensive' argument presumes there is only one way of doing nuclear power. The reality is that there are countless ways of doing it. It's like criticizing chemical energy because there are some dangerous things you can do with it, but if you said "let's ban chemical energy" no one would take you seriously (rightly so).
@@angel-7119 Tbh, it's mostly green energy folks such as Leona Morgan here in this video. There has been in the past propaganda pushed by fossil fuel companies against nuclear energy, but those reins have been taken up by the wind and solar folks. I wish it wasn't the case but it's the truth.
What are you talking about? My solar panels can't have a melt down, and don't produce toxic waste that cannot be stored anywhere on the planet during operation.
But, but, but, when Iran, a country that never intends to have nuclear arms, wants to pursue nuclear power. the US and those other 🐩🐩placed sanctions on Iran.
that might put a cap on the growth of AI, since a single data center requires a municipal nucular reactor to power it...given the size of such a facility incl the cooling towers, waste disposal, etc, u obvsly cant build too many...
Can't even comment Thank you because people or bots that don't like my words are silenced. Don't know why I try, but , its hard to watch injustice and not express an opinion. Because others want to abuse reporting processes to punish me for my opinions. Its not conservative voices getting silenced. Even a post like this is considered bullying?
You know what's also not carbon-free clueless indigenous woman? Wind and solar power, there is no such thing as clean energy all have risks that have to be dealt with.
@@kaiyack neither is a complete solution to our energy needs and one hasn't been developed for the commercial market. more pie in the sky horseshit. pragmatism is the key. let's do something instead of kowtowing to the hackysack brigade.
@@romulus_ah yes because nuclear is totally developed for wide spread safe commercial use with little oversight. Magically the rate of accidents will go down right?
All the windmills and solar panels will never meet the energy needs of the world. Plain and simple fact. We've made enormous strides in nuclear energy and advanced it for maximum efficiency and maximum safety.
@@kaiyack It always does, back in the 1980's there was a videotape battle Betamax and VHS, Betamax was superior, but VHS won, it was better funded. In the end it always comes down to money.
Jeff Bazos is like Mr. Burns
But Liberals like him.
So is ELON MUSK, no?
Something else the US taxpayer can pay for so they can make more profits rather than pay livable wages? Great plan.
Hey, if it is broken why fix it?
Yea now we can get our Amazon purchase in an hour instead of next day 😭
Not to mention fallout from even Newer Nuke Plants .
Nuclear power plant jobs?
I worked at the Millstone Reactor at Niantic CT Built by Halibuton Brown and Root , Dick Cheney's Corp . Glowed green at Night . I wore a Dosimeter Badge , down the Road developed 4 forms of Cancer . Wouldn't recommend that you work at a Nuclear Plant site .
My City invested in Palo Verde in AZ while it was being built. They are running out of water from Colorado River. WTF are they going to use when they have to cool down the bars after they've been spent?
Replace the bars with new bwrs😢
This would be something id be in favor of if it wasnt being driven by AI, crypto, and these tech companies specifically. I dont trust Google to work with the best, safest companies tbh.
Saying nuclear doesn't count as carbon-free energy because its supply chain is not carbon-free seems ... intentionally obtuse.
Thats why its called a "transition." The first solar panel was not built using solar power. The first oil was not drilled using oil. The first steam engine was not made possible by steam power. The first coal was not mined using coal. The first tools were built without tools. The first fire was built without fire.
... what's your point?
Yes, in general, I observe very few in the activism space speaking realistically when it comes to energy technology.
The raw materials for the first solar panel were mined using fossil fuels, and they will be for the foreseeable future. Same goes for batteries. The mining alone, e.g., for copper, requires sifting through tons of rock just to get a relatively small amount of the desired material. It is energy intensive and wasteful.
Production of renewable devices also affects the environment in places such as China, South America, and Africa.
To compare the different energy sources in a fair manner w.r.t. environmental impact is a major technical challenge. I get the impression that nuclear is in this regard a net improvement over renewables. But I'm not certain. What I am certain of is that I can safely disregard most of what is being claimed regarding energy production.
You want to study the effects of Uranium/depleted Uranium look at the US Military troops that served in the Iraq war and the civilians in Iraq who were all exposed to depleted Uranium by the US Military.
❤ AMEN
Mmmmm😮
The level of greed is astonishing today… no cure for that. .Dorothy Parker wrote a poem entitled The Flaw in Paganism , “Drink and dance, laugh and lie, love the reeling midnight through for tomorrow we shall die, (but alas we never do.”) seems fitting.
Yet
My parents said never play with fire
@@akjordan1680 So stop coal, natural gas, and biomass and move to nuclear? 👍
They also said, don't sh** where you eat, but here we are.
there's only one way out of this, we ALL need to massively reduce our OVERALL consumption and live much, much poorer, ALL of us
Overpopulation is the real problem that needs to be addressed. The population needs to be reduced by 75%.
Lol! Tell that to the global warming alarmists who use private jets to fly around the world eating the finest foods as they tell us we need to own nothing and eat bugs
I am already there. And it sucks. The oligarchs are crooks 😢😮 ! 😱😳😡🥺👿😒😜🤪
@@Valkron11 fuck them, what about you Valk? what are YOU gonna do?
@@MrDannyHeim Nah, I'm gonna consume more 😈
What an informative show. Really impressive.
Can't get rid of nuclear waste, and it lasts forever. I'd rather not have AI, and I'm tired of these decisions being made for me.
Your tired of decisions being made for you, yet you sell your soul to the billionaires pushing green energy.
Thanks, Amy, for your engagement!🎉
It is good to get some professional level reporting that isn't oligarch-owned. Don't forget to chip in a bit to help pay for it!
What could possibly go wrong?
This doesn’t even address the issue of nuclear waste which is substantial to say the least! We don’t want to solve one problem just to create a new one! Besides, as was pointed out, the enrichment process needed to make uranium usable requires energy to operate the centrifuge which has to come from somewhere; usually a fossil fuel burning generation plant. It’s an absurd path to choose when the earth itself is brimming with geothermal energy!
We are developing new methods to reduce waste.
If they could get Elon Musk to shoot spent Fuel Rods into the Sun , it might be viable , NOT . 500,000 Years to turn Plutonium into Lead .
@@Curt-GevertWhat are they ? A new 🦠 Bacterium they eats Radioactive ☢️ Materials .
HYDROGEN ECONOMY, GEOTHERMAL ENERGY & OCEAN THERMAL ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATION is the only alternative today to fight economic crisis & energy crisis.
No nuclear can work, if you like those, you can invest in companies that do that work
building nuclear power plant is not green and you have to build lots of them, it is said that doubling the nuclear power plant we have right now will only contribute to 4% in less gaz emission. we need to slow down and start to produce better and lasting product. but no one are saying that. remember the gaz emission effect on climate of today is from 30 years ago emissions. So we are in deep deep trouble since no one has slow down yet.
Well guess what wind farms and solar panels are not the answer. They won't even cover the smallest fraction of our energy needs
What are you talking about? Nuclear energy is already 18% of power generation, doubling would be 36%. And it's not green, but it's easily the greenest thing we have that can actually power our world
@@aronm5329 According to scenarios from the World Nuclear Association and the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (both nuclear lobby organisations), doubling the capacity of nuclear power worldwide in 2050 would only decrease greenhouse gas emissions by around 4%. But in order to do that, the world would need to bring 37 new large nuclear reactors to the grid every year from now, year on year, until 2050.
@@jeanyvestheriault8362 I wasn't able to find this anywhere. Can you link your source?
@@jeanyvestheriault8362 OMG that's in 2050 and worldwide energy is expected to go up by as much as 101% by then. To double our overall energy and still decrease co2 emissions by 4% is freakin' phenomenal!
You kind of just proved my point. If we 4x our solar and wind, and supplement the remainder with coal, we would increase co2 emissions by over 80% of current levels. What would be your solution?
Nuclear engineer here. This is a terrible idea and will not end well.
SMRs don't scale down well, can't just be situated anywhere especially not in risky places like the flood plains of Houston where they let people build homes, would need constant security and competent monitoring and maintenance, the NRC has to approve them, they have to buy sufficient insurance which is a deal-breaker in its own right, they need massive capital investment, they take years to build, finding and training enough plant staff will also be very challenging (and doesn't scale well with SMRs), and people won't want them in their communities with near rabid-level objection.
The cryptobros just what the shiny pretty unobtanium tech like flying cars to privatize the profits and socialize the externalities like costs and risks.
I suggest a book _50 Years in Nuclear Power: A Retrospective_ by S. Levy formerly of GE. Our computer names were all named after The Simpsons' characters. 😅
Nuclear energy definitely needs safety improvements, but it's easily the most efficient and one of the best energy sources we have currently
Thanks, I didn't realize exactly our current situation now I will act even more appropriate to circumstances
Why isn’t THORIUM being explained instead of NUCLEAR?
Nuke power is crap unless it's with Thorium. Hear that Gates?
Gates hears nothing and helps nothing. Promised CoVid shots in 2020 for poor nations. Kept patients on injections and barely delivered 10ks shots.
Aliens use small Ion- Thorium Reactors on the Ship that crashed at Roswell. My dad was an Air Force intelligence Officer at Wright Patterson when the Debris and 4 Beings arrived there . 👽👽👽👽 One was alive for 4 Days . 4 Saucers circled White Sands Missile Range that Day . They aimed a Radar array at the last one and it came down . There's a lot more to the Story .
Green Energy and Green business is the only future.
Do we need nuclear power... i think we probably do.
Do we need AI data centers... nah!
Yeah, that's also my take on it. Anti-nuclear activists are often incredibly misguided on the actual dangers of nuclear plants. Imo they're a great backbone for an energy grid that also relies on wind/solar/hydro.
Having them power AI and crypto is a shame though.
Yeah agreed. Nuclear is not as dangerous as people think. The danger of carbon pollution is much greater.
Madness...🤦♀️
Why do you have someone on claiming that nuclear is not carbon free? This is such a bad faith argument. All power sources take energy to build and setup so the same thing could be said of wind/solar.
Nuclear plants have a higher energy density than wind and solar farms. Idk why this person is arguing about land use when this is the case. You need to have people on who have not been biased against nuclear for decades already.
Putting cryptocurrency (specifically currencies that require lots of compute) tech alongside training and use of Large language Models use for AI is a very misleading coupling of two totally different uses of energy. LLMs are use for things like translation and learning which helps enhance understanding and communication among people including those who are misinformed or uniformed about energy challenges of the world. Cryptocurrencies that require tons of compute in the other hand are in no way essential or necessary for anything that advances humanity.
Deregulation is definitely a worry, but current safety standards are good.
Sure, nuclear energy has carbon emissions in its supply chains, but so does solar & wind. The regulations on the nuclear energy industry mean that it's actually far less wasteful than what solar and wind will be (when their life cycle ends).
No doubt there's issues relating to indigenous people and child/forced labour, but that's a general issue of global capitalism & mining companies. Metals needed for solar & wind have some really awful supply chains, such as the DRC. The largest ranium source Kazak, which I struggle to find much info on, so its likely injustices happening. But no doubt Canada and Australia (sure there are awful indigenous issues with land use in oz) will have far better mining/labour practices than the countries cobalt/nickel is sourced from.
One more thing that wasn't mentioned is that we need baseload power! If tech companies don't have nuclear to supply their demand 24/7, they won't be using renewable & battery tech. It'll be mostly gas, as is the case now!
Funny how the Nuclear Bros™ have never heard of pumped storage or deep geothermal.
Seriously, its too kind on the environment.
Geothermal is the ONLY way to go besides Wind , and Solar .
Invest in those companies
@Curt-Gevert Everyone is investing in Zuckerberg and Musk , funny how that works. Politics mixed with the Entrepreneurial . But is there Oil , or Rice , in Space , I'd love to find out , Trump and Musk should be the first Visitors to Mars with a Live Stream . They can dance to YMCA 🎵🎶🤣
@@Curt-Gevert lol because publicly traded companies always do whats best for the planet
Surveillance/defence drones are to be leased out with small modular reactors to enforce security and deter any protest.
People saw them in New Jersey
Nuclear is greener than any fossil fuel and is more reliable. Let's keep the nuclear industry on its toes with ever-increasing safety, but not get distracted by a misguided total distrust of it. It's worth noting even some of Chernobyl was still running in the year 2000.
Totally, Matt. And Chernobyl area is mostly clean of radiation etc. Fear porn is what is used against the SAFEST energy (nuclear) ever devised by men. Lowest number of casualties in entire energy sector. Coal killed millions, oil/gas killed hundreds of thousands, hydro took huge swaths of land away. These are abundant and okay, mind you, but those are the costs. Green energy IS NOT green.
Chernobol was a graphite moderated, water cooled, RBMK reactor. The design of Soviet reactors like that were flawed from the start, but the socialist system didn't allow for dissent. Further, the people running the reactor failed to follow their own protocols, related to socialism. The same kind of socialist system most of these people want implemented. Modern reactors are extremely safe.
Very true!
@Curt-Gevert Quite right, Curt. I retired from power engineering 10 years ago but am well read on the topic. Generation III and generation IV reactors are superbly safe, and have very little dangerous waste. Frederik Pohl's 1987 novel "Chernobyl" has a lot of actual info in it. People should read up on this.
Renewables are always a misnomer. They should be called more slowly terminals. All energy requires limited resources. If we want our society to last millenia instead of centuries, we need to move away from Nuclear, Hydro, even Wind and Solar, and simply use less. All non-safetynet usage of energy should be massively taxed, and profiteering from things like Crypto investing should be taxed a magnitude more than that. School Children should be taught that the term "renewable" was a giant lie made by financial feudalists to shore up and preserve their power in the same breadth they are taught that all clergyment are con artists.
I had no idea our country wants to triple nuclear energy!!!!!!!!!
But isn't nuclear now safer with all of our new technology it's nothing like the old just asking? As according to research it can now be recycled today almost 90% of it is recycled
Leona Morgan's comments about the realities for Native communities is excellent. We still have 600 superfund sites of toxic and hazardous chemicals from WWII in the Northern Hemisphere. Dialog and sharing are so vital going forward.
I don't understand the push for Nuclear Power Plants when we are full aware of its dangers . This is unacceptable & I am very surprise these at E Commerce & Big TEC investing in this .
The push is coming from an army of Reddit bots and tech Bros who think they’re suddenly environmentalist by touting nuclear.
Are u really surprised profits over people
@@judybrennan7930 well said
Ceasefire Biden.
The activists worried about mining and cleanup for nuclear are honestly heroes. As much as the power plant is great (imho), the externalities need to be addressed as with any industry. I hope people who agree also worry about how much (more) radiation is released from the coal industry (as a specific concern, not just the blanket term "pollution").
As crazy as it sounds, they may have the ability to transform the energy sector away from fossil fuels with this move. Nuclear is indeed greener than solar when mining, manufacturing and maintenance costs are included.
Nuclear power also spreads less radioactive waste into the environment, that honor goes to coal with natural gas from fracking coming in second. Because the radioactive isotopes are what are desired, mining for fuel for nuclear power in fact removes radioactive material from the environment that was naturally there.
yeah might as well make nuclear waste in the pursuit of shit coins and anime porn why not?
Disclaimer: I worked in the nuclear industry with ex-GE Nuclear engineers. Nuclear is currently expensive, impractical, and inherently riskier than renewables plus storage. SMRs are also terror targets and multiply the number containment areas that must be guarded and audited.
Surveying YT videos on this topic, there are zillions of sockpuppet/troll commenters that look like Russian bots with LLM-like language chat bots or boiler room humans expressing odd support without a grasp of native English with similar idiosyncrasies. It's within the realm of possibility that Elon or MAANG are trying to manufacture consent for a nuclear "resurgence", even if it's unworkable, uneconomical, and pointless now in most applications.
This rhetoric should be translated into language the average laymen can understand. We all know the average voter in the U.S. needs things explained simply and in a way that informs them of how this directly/indirectly impacts them. Democracy Now’s message is important and should be understood by all.
Nuclear emits less radiation than coal power plants, and obviously less carbon and smog.
Wrong
@kellywright5282 You realize that radioactive particles are released in the emissions of coal... Nuclear power plants don't regularly release any nuclear material it's all packaged into concrete and metal containers. There are some instances of nuclear material being released, but it's only in rare circumstances; in the same way that a car is more dangerous than flying even though flying can seem scarier.
That figure doesn’t include the uranium mining, processing, transport and disposal of waste. You don’t just shovel uranium into the firebox.
We don't need either....solar and wind are free and don't kill anyone.
@@WanderingExistence nuclear plants release tritium on the regular. Tritium is bio accumulated by mollusks.
3x0=0!!! The promised goals???
There is a lot of energy waste in the U.S.. Same thing with water. We take too much for granted and forget how much effort, money, and other things were required to make these things. You have to be intelligent to create articial intelligence. Mankind has not displayed this ability yet.
Candus can use 90 % recycled radioactive material as fuel and have 7 layers of safety features.
Although, I do think Bitcoin is ridiculous and when we become more energy efficient we find new ways of needing tons more energy.
And yet, Canadian reactors continually release tritium into the environment-aka the great lakes. Tritium is bio accumulated by mollusks which is amplified up trophic levels
I always wonder what the carbon footprint is for these climate conferences. How many flights? How much infrastructure is built? Signs printed? Hotel laundry? Hotel energy? Lights, computers, tablets, phones, broadcast equipment, etc are used?
Why are these meetings not held digitally?
Whatever the power source, the server centers run extremely hot, so you'd need huge volume of water for cooling.
For some reason "The Simpsons" comes to mind
Why can’t we stop data centers?
Who said data centers are vital?
considering that your little comment lives in a data center -- you.
@@romulus_ yeah but one bitcoin transaction using the same amount of power as one household’s use is obscene !
@@rthompson7282 regulations are key.
Stop fear-mongering about nuclear power! We're never going to get people to use less energy. That is not going to happen. Let's focus on getting good regulations in place, and do it right!
We also can develop new safety systems, too.
Isn't nuclear green? Wtf
You mean the glow from the waste that can't be stored anywhere on the planet?
Yucca Mtn in Nevada@@heavymetalpermaculture
You think it’s green because two people paid a lot of money to run bots on reddit
@kaiyack dude, question: how do you make steel?
@@cleomenes01 lol guess you havent heard of new processes that don’t need the coke for reduction
Nuclear energy is the future.
Not controversial. Early environmentalists saw nuclear energy as an answer to fossil fuels.
And early environmentalist did not know that tritium is bio accumulated by mollusks and amplified up trophic levels.
good thing the AI bubble will burst way before any of those plants are finished
Very informative. Thank you DN.
Why would a monopoly and its partner, both of whom are complicit in genocide, care about the safety of old reactors?
We are going to make all the same mistakes we made last century, except this will be the last time.
Amy what a significant DEMOCRACY NOW that begins to illustrate the high tech aspect and the voices of native realities and a nuclear energy information resource service.
I feel that if I knew more about how bitcoin was made, I would be more annoyed
UN , Indigenous Climate Actions, New Zealand march to protest Founding document, Treaty of Wangi being taken away trough a bill.UN , Indigenous Climate Actions, New Zealand march to protest Founding document, Treaty of Wangi being taken away trough a bill.
Lets ask Ourselves..How much energy goes to these Centers..and truly what is being funded here..
$1,200 being added to every household in Australia brings the realities of change and how it effects people's pocketbooks illustrating macro and micro policy realities for decision making.
Will the magical “indigenous” people create the “green and clean” energy and study the health effects of whatever they deem is their issues? Because we can all sit back and let them fix it all with some Gaia mysticism and bright colors.
Australia’s PM is owned by the hydrocarbon industry
Thanks 👍
Oh so this is how skynet gets released.
de Vries has great taste in LEGO, as evidenced by the many nice sets on display behind him in the glass fronted display case.
Good bots
Besides the spent fuel, what happens to the plant itself at its end of life? Are the materials (concrete, metals, etc.) able to be recycled for future use?
From what I’ve seen so far, they are either entombed in-place or buried somewhere else. Even the SMRs (small modular reactor) I’ve seen proposed are intended to be entombed in-place once they’re considered depleted or failed.
Literally skynet.
Just make sure if you choose to build these that you're also have a recycling plant that puts the byproduct to work
Nuclear is our best option. We should have been investing in a nuclear future for decades but let fear-mongering get the best of us and it has led to runaway carbon emissions and a greatly degraded environment.
Totally agree. The fallacy of the 'nuclear is too expensive' argument presumes there is only one way of doing nuclear power. The reality is that there are countless ways of doing it. It's like criticizing chemical energy because there are some dangerous things you can do with it, but if you said "let's ban chemical energy" no one would take you seriously (rightly so).
who is doing the fear mongering and why?
@@angel-7119 Tbh, it's mostly green energy folks such as Leona Morgan here in this video. There has been in the past propaganda pushed by fossil fuel companies against nuclear energy, but those reins have been taken up by the wind and solar folks. I wish it wasn't the case but it's the truth.
Best option for rich people to keep making money with colonial power systems. Gates has a pile of yellow cake and you’re selling it.
What are you talking about? My solar panels can't have a melt down, and don't produce toxic waste that cannot be stored anywhere on the planet during operation.
So this is where the matrix started
They'll cool all of the electronics with Brawndo!
But, but, but, when Iran, a country that never intends to have nuclear arms, wants to pursue nuclear power. the US and those other 🐩🐩placed sanctions on Iran.
The Copper Skinned American Aboriginals need HELP too! We are the Mound Builders of the Americas!
Too dangerous to shut down - then ai facilitates itself!
Nuclear energy is cool
that might put a cap on the growth of AI, since a single data center requires a municipal nucular reactor to power it...given the size of such a facility incl the cooling towers, waste disposal, etc, u obvsly cant build too many...
Plutonium is forever
Can't even comment Thank you because people or bots that don't like my words are silenced. Don't know why I try, but , its hard to watch injustice and not express an opinion. Because others want to abuse reporting processes to punish me for my opinions. Its not conservative voices getting silenced. Even a post like this is considered bullying?
Earth will survive and recover, I’m just not sure about the future of the human race
Robot’s are def gonna do us in
Im sure we will need more to for more electricity foe EV's
Seek peace
DOGE doesnt exist, btw. 😂
😂 200 nuclear power plants.
I still don't understand what crypto is. lol
Radio Nucleides for Chat GPT . Do I have a Choice ?
Sure combine billionaires with nuclear energy what could go wrong? 😂
pluto in aquarius
Awesome, Nuclear is safe, clean, and efficient!
You know what's also not carbon-free clueless indigenous woman? Wind and solar power, there is no such thing as clean energy all have risks that have to be dealt with.
Nukes. What complete idiots.
get an education on the subject and realize just how foolish this comment is.
@@romulus_get an education on pumped storage and deepbore geothermal. Plenty of base load there bruh
@@kaiyack neither is a complete solution to our energy needs and one hasn't been developed for the commercial market. more pie in the sky horseshit. pragmatism is the key. let's do something instead of kowtowing to the hackysack brigade.
@@romulus_ 🍼
@@romulus_ah yes because nuclear is totally developed for wide spread safe commercial use with little oversight. Magically the rate of accidents will go down right?
All the windmills and solar panels will never meet the energy needs of the world. Plain and simple fact. We've made enormous strides in nuclear energy and advanced it for maximum efficiency and maximum safety.
Funny how you Nuclear Bros™ have never heard of pumped storage or deep bore geothermal.
Source?
@@kaiyack You're free to invest in companies that do that.
@@Curt-Gevert so money should pick which technology wins and loses?
@@kaiyack It always does, back in the 1980's there was a videotape battle Betamax and VHS, Betamax was superior, but VHS won, it was better funded. In the end it always comes down to money.
🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🕊👍
Snafu
!
Why do 2powerplant trade office Black hole scintes at coa Moon bace doee eat at trader Joe Washington DC that 7 inter net
.