796 points · 890 comments · 1 day ago · leonidasrup
bluewin.chjokteur
thelastgallon
1) Has the lowest deaths/TWH: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-p...
2) Any country that is not US absolutely needs to invest in nuclear technology. This is for your own security. In addition to providing energy security, it also provides physical security (with a bit more work).
Without nuclear, your country will remain vulnerable to:
1) Direct attacks
2) Sanctions which destroy your economy and quality of life of your citizens
3) Fossil fuel disruptions, either intentional or malicious
With nuclear + solar, you have an unbeatable combination of all forms of security. Every country wastes lots and lots of money on many useless initiatives. Nuclear might seem costly, but security is somewhat important.
The rest of the world on clean energy will ultimately help people in US, because there will be less foreign adventures and oil will be a lot cheaper when all that demand is destroyed, supply chains are not disrupted by these wars.
starbix
We should focus on extending our hydro power storage capacity instead.
There will be a referendum anyways, so I think it's unlikely the ban will actually be lifted.
bryanlarsen
reddalo
We still have to deal with the consequences of a referendum hold not so long after che Chernobyl accident which made it illegal to build and operate nuclear power plants.
GL26
Arodex
Especially nuclear. It is now economically non-viable.
Archelaos
orwin
Probably not economically viable in Switzerland though.
Handrail
Kon5ole
It's not a cheap source of electricity, it's a way for someone to get money from taxpayers to subsidize their business.
t1234s
thelastgallon
Imagine having ports all around the country where a sub can plug in and provide power. Instead of building massive ports to ship stored energy (coal, oil, gas) from somewhere else in the world, its much easier to just have a plug in port and access nuclear energy.
All countries have their own fleet, but can also tap into a global fleet. There is a small problem with clean energy, long term seasonal storage and disruptive events. Germans have a word for it. Dunkelflaute: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunkelflaute
With EV batteries as an enormous reservoir of energy storage (dump all excess production when electricity is priced negative; use the EV batteries instead of peaker plants) and nuclear subs, the transition to clean energy can be complete.
jurgenaut23
Arodex
https://www.heidi.news/explorations/black-out-le-talon-d-ach...
KeiferWise
AFF87
bbu
Zigurd
mikaeluman
Great news, just hoping the people understand this as well.
thelastgallon
nxy
Danox
m101
- nuclear power is expensive by choice. It is not inherent to nuclear power
- nuclear waste is not a problem
- nuclear energy comes in many forms. Not only high pressure reactors
- we are all going to be poorer, and live in a more polluted, higher CO2 world, because of all the people that choose to not inform themselves about the truth on nuclear
- the harms from radiation exposure are mostly precisely zero, and require large exposure to be non-zero
There really is no excuse for people to be misinformed. If you actually want to understand this issue start here, but there are many other sources out there that can also help:
gordianknotbook.com
Or the substack:
substack.com/@jackdevanney
tancop
pfannl
comrade1234
arjie
0: I personally like the look of wind turbines but I understand many don't. The appearance is likely why the Trump administration canceled such projects.
staticshock
lenerdenator
Honestly, so long as the water table isn't too close, that's not a terrible place to put a nuclear reactor.
4ggr0
so let's put our strength into battery storage. invest in research towards it. research it ourselves. build out renewable energy. sponsor such things in foreign places we steal, ehrm, i mean, trade resources from.
this whole nuclear debate feels like a defeat. well, we tried, seems too hard, let's got back to ye' olden times.
i am also aware that we use french nuclear power as a backbone constantly and still boast as being so advanced and green, but that's also helping my point.
[0]or fusion, or just a different way to boil water without creating waste we have to bury in a mountain and think about how we want to make sure that nobody every accidentally opens the toxic caves in the next thousands of years.
megaman821
whycome
beanjuiceII
Krasnol
slackfan
firefax
Switzerland, unlike the USA, seems capable of safely operating these plants, and with advances in breeder technology new plants doesn't nessecarily mean new mining operations, which often are quite harsh on the surrounding area.
khalic
nullbio
warumdarum
The discourse on nuclear is still quite chaotic in politics in Switzerland. All left leaning parties and greens parties are strongly against nuclear. I am not expecting informed and civil discussions about this topic.
Switzerland has a summer/winter energy problem. We have lots of potential of producing energy in the spring and summer (when our dams are full from the melting of snow and the sun is shining), and much less so in the winter. We can still improve 10 to 20% our hydro production, but that's it. All the water sheds are already well used and rely on our glaciers to replenish, which will become less predictable with climate change.
We shouldn't completely closing the doors to all forms of nuclear technology. Obviously, we can't build blindy without any considerations. But we may need it on the second half of the century, especially if we are going to electrify all forms of transport. We can't be buying France's nuclear energy all the time.