Bill Gates to build next-generation nuclear facility in Wyoming
The plant will be built on a retired coal-fired power plant, as US government calls for carbon emissions cuts.
Do this all over the country instead of putting up wind turbines.
Nuclear power is back
- Thread starter Crazyhole
- Start date
Do this all over the country instead of putting up wind turbines.
If Bill Gates is building it, will they have to shut it down every couple of days to keep it working correctly?Bill Gates to build next-generation nuclear facility in Wyoming
The plant will be built on a retired coal-fired power plant, as US government calls for carbon emissions cuts.www.aljazeera.com
Do this all over the country instead of putting up wind turbines.
Last I checked, wind turbines don't kill people and contaminate an entire region when something goes wrong. But then again, a major reactor meltdown is super-rare, right guys?
- Chernobyl (1986) Ukraine
- Windscale Pile (1957) UK
- Kyshtym (1957) Russia
- Fukushima Daiichi (2011) Japan
- Fukui Prefecture (2004) Japan
- Buenos Aires (1983) Argentina
- Forsmark (2006) Sweden
- Saint Laurent des Eaux (1980) France
- Simi Valley (1957) USA
- Tokaimura (1999) Japan
- Goiania (1987) Brazil
- Chalk River (1952) Canada
- Paks (2003) Hungary
- Oak Harbor (2002) USA
- Greifswald (1975) East Germany
- Jaslovske Bohunice (1976) Slovakia
- Jaslovske Bohunice (1977) Slovakia
- Three Mile Island (1979) USA
- Vaud (1969) Switzerland
- Marcoule (2011) France
Yes, they are very, very rare. This is also newer technology with better failsafes, and aren't built on a coast where a tsunami can cause an issue.
If environmentalists hadn't opposed nuclear from the beginning, we wouldn't have global warming.
This is where I differ with many of my environmentalist friends. I'm not pro-turbines but I am pro nuclear. I do think there are real hazards which must be mitigated and brought to an acceptable risk tolerance but I think it's a viable solution. Turbines by and large are tax break shelters which only allow companies to offset dirtier means of energy production.Bill Gates to build next-generation nuclear facility in Wyoming
The plant will be built on a retired coal-fired power plant, as US government calls for carbon emissions cuts.
Do this all over the country instead of putting up wind turbines.
Do you even know any of the details of most of those? Like Oak Harbor: “On March 5, 2002, maintenance workers at the Davis-Besse nuclear power plant in Oak Harbor, Ohio, discovered a football-sized void in the reactor vessel head. The void, caused by corrosion, did not cause a reactor accident, and did not actually cause any problems while the reactor was operating. The near-failure of one of three barriers between the reactor fuel and the environment, however, is still considered a serious nuclear safety incident.”
This is evidence of the safety of the technology and processes and they made them even safer since.
Even Obama was getting on board with nuclear until Fukushima.
Glad they’re going with smaller units. The two plants coming online in Georgia soon are huge but they’ve been building them for a decade + and the cost over runs have been ridiculous. These small units seem a little more manageable from a constructability/cost perspective.
It definitely seems like we missed a golden opportunity. I look at a state like California, and if they had embraced nuclear power they would:
1: have reliable energy
2: have reservoirs and canals that help avoid drought conditions
3: have more recreation opportunities
4: would have boosted their farm economy
It's kind of a no-brainer.
I am too. But given the history I pointed out earlier in this thread (those major calamities were just the top 20), we need to be SUPER-careful when it comes to safety.
Yeah, let's build a bunch of nuclear power plant in a state prone to major earthquakes. No problems there.
Your list of 20 includes approximately zero deaths and 1 area that became uninhabitable for 30 years. Stop buying the fear mongering talking points that make it seem like a nuclear power plant can become a bomb. It doesn't work that way.
Wind mills do kill 10's of thousands of birds each year, are made of a product that can not be recycled, and use most of the energy they eventually create is used in building them. I do agree there is a huge downside to nuclear, but Windmills are not part of the answer.
Zero deaths? Try again. And given some of the clean-ups, uninhabitable for 30 years is on the optimistic side.
You read my list of the Top 20 nuclear accidents and I'm "buying the fear"? I said in my previous post that I'm supportive of nuclear power -- but only if we do it right. Humans have this troublesome tendency to screw up even the most 'foolproof' systems.
As I recall, the Titanic was a modern marvel of construction at the time and was hailed on its maiden voyage as the unsinkable ship.
Interesting analogy. More people died on the Titanic by 10-fold than have died in nuclear power plant accidents. Chernobyl was the worst of all, and it was what, 30 or 40? That's with old technology as well. Nuclear is clean and safe and it will save the planet from global warming.
Think again. Literally thousands of people have died and will die as a result of these accidents. In 2005 the UN predicted 4,000 people might eventually die as a result of the radiation exposure they experienced at Chernobyl.
I'm reminded of the t-shirts that were a hot commodity after the Three Mile Island accident. The front said: "I Survived Three Mile Island." The back added: " ... I think."
Lol. 35 years later and we are waiting on the death count to really be apparent from Chernobyl. "They're gonna die eventually, and when they do it'll be because of something that happened decades ago".
You're always good for a laugh
He’s being consistent. Everyone that dies after getting a runny nose will be added to Trump’s COVID death toll, after all. This is just more of the same.
How about we break the mold on this topic? Seems like this is an opportunity to agree. Yes there are Risk, it’s worth it if those risk can be mitigated. Seems like we are arguing for arguing sake.
Exactly. Nobody in this thread has said we shouldn't pursue nuclear powered energy options.
Which was the point. But, as usual, our Usual Suspects felt the need to argue that nuclear power plant catastrophes 'weren't all that bad.'
Good grief. 🙄
No, you willfully ignorant jackass. We’re making the point that not all of those were catastrophes.
Do you have anything to offer other than self-righteous indignation?
Baloney. The point was made that Chernobyl — the worst of the all — wasn’t that bad. Clowns like you jump on that bandwagon and I‘m the “ignorant jackass”? Keep telling yourself that, bud.
Exactly. The worst one of all killed 30 people, and the rest received the same amount of radiation as a couple of cat scans. They were still operating the plant until 2000 and it may come back online in the future.Baloney. The point was made that Chernobyl — the worst of the all — wasn’t that bad. Clowns like you jump on that bandwagon and I‘m the “ignorant jackass”? Keep telling yourself that, bud.
If you want to act like the nuclear power plant catastrophes we've seen through history were no big deal, by all means, spin away to your heart's content. But I'll pass from further commentary.
You just lack perspective. It's attitudes like yours that have produced more coal plants that have damaged the climate and now we are faced with a situation where the coasts are going to be flooded, mass famine, and rolling blackouts for as long as you or I will be alive.
He was a kid when nuclear was super scary so it probably factors into things. "Duck and cover" probably has a lasting emotional effect.
At some point you have to grow past your childhood to become a functional adult.
It doesn’t matter. The federal government is still going to try to buy and “protect” 30% of the land by 2030 and 50% by 2050 to help stem it all off.
And running on diesel power to rotate water in cooling pools.
I don't think people realize how 1950s that was, and yet they go around as look stupid as they say, "The Japanese have the latest technology, and they couldn't stop a nuclear meltdown!"
Sigh ... the US has caskets for a reason. It's one of the few, good things that came out of the non-sense of shutting down Yucca Mountain. The US gov't has to pay for the caskets. Pure, simple, passive radiation dissipation.
it's like a COVID death. If someone died while driving car, but was also exposed 25 year ago to radiation... Nuclear accident death, SOLVED!
