Young climate activist tells Greenpeace to drop ‘old-fashioned’ anti-nuclear stance
Young climate activist tells Greenpeace to drop ‘old-fashioned’ anti-nuclear stance
Swedish teenager Ia Anstoot says group’s ‘unscientific’ opposition to EU nuclear power serves fossil fuel interests
You're viewing a single thread.
More pro nuke propagate while Japan dumps waste into the ocean. Perfect timing actually. to all the haters and downvaters I give you a link showing how solar and wind are cheaper and better. Of course you will ignore it. Who needs evidence when you're already sold amirite
KPFA - The Ralph Nader Radio Hour: The False Promise of Small Nuclear Reactors – The Ralph Nader Radio Hour – August 21, 2023
Episode webpage: https://kpfa.org/program/the-ralph-nader-radio-hour/
Media file: https://archives.kpfa.org/data/20230821-Mon1100.mp3
The fact that you're bringing up Japan (which is massively overblown - you're at more radiation risk from a coal power plant) shows you're not serious about this.
I’m curious about the radiation risk from a coal power plant, are radioactive carbon isotopes generated in the coal firing process?
Here's an article - coal naturally contains trace amounts of radioactive elements and burning a bunch of it concentrates them.
Carbon contains radioactive isotopes and if you use a lot of it to generate electricity you end up with a lot of it in a single spot. It's specifically carbon-14 you measure when using radiocarbon dating to estimate how old an item is.
... approximately 2,000 coal samples from the Western United States ... concentrations of uranium fall in the range from slightly below 1 to 4 parts per million (ppm). ... Coals with more than 20 ppm uranium are rare in the United States. Thorium concentrations in coal fall within a similar 1–4 ppm range, ... Coals with more than 20 ppm thorium are extremely rare.
https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1997/fs163-97/FS-163-97.html
concentrations of coals in China are estimated based on uranium analyses of 1535 coal samples ... Late Jurassic and Early Cretaceous (J3–K1), and Eogene and Neogene (E–N) coals are 2.91, 5.43, 3.67, 1.18, 1.84, and 3.92 μg/g, respectively. The overall average weighted uranium concentration of coals in China is 2.31 μg/g.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544206001113
AFAIK that's 1.18-5.43 ppm.
Obviously, when you burn that, it gets concentrated.
Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to ignorance. They probably really do care but have little formal education and also the algorithms have decided to send them to a particular bubble of the internet.
Dude, the Japanese nuclear waste water is barely radioactive. You receive a higher dose of radiation eating a fucking banana.
Well, bananas are crazy radioactive...
I had to get measured before and after training to work in nuclear in the military, and they ordered us not to eat bananas for a week before either test.
Not that bananas are bad for you, it's just exposure is tracked well below limits there'll actually be negative side effects. So eating a couple bananas recently is enough to throw up red flags on the test
Bananas aren't even that radioactive. 0.1 microsieverts.
If you really want to expose yourself to large amounts of radiation, start smoking. 160,000 microsieverts a year, contains radioactive polonium and lead.
Not that bananas are bad for you, it’s just exposure is tracked well below limits there’ll actually be negative side effects. So eating a couple bananas recently is enough to throw up red flags on the test
because you wanna be combative, I'll be the same.
what are we supposed to do when it's not sunny, or if we live in parts of the world that don't see much/any sun, and it's not windy. batteries? you already know we aren't at a point that is viable yet, we'll get there, not today. what are we supposed to do when the entire plant scales up the demand for solar panels to replace the lack of nuclear, and suddenly there isn't enough scale to fulfil that demand and prices skyrocket.
I want a future of energy stability that is able to handle a changing climate, and changing political climates. I want a world where people have endless, cheap, free, low carbon cost energy without it being the plaything of whoever is a political leader this week. a combination of nuclear, solar, wind and anything else we can throw in there does that.
going all in on just two that have similar problems, does not.
Yh solar and wind is better, until it's night time and the wind is still.
Until mass power storage is a solved problem we need base load power the demand of which can currently only be met by fossil fuels or nuclear.
Honestly, saying "yh, but wind and solar!?!?" whilst clearly having very little concept of the power demands of a nation makes you seem extremely silly.
You can use hydro dams, pump storage, bio fuel, geothermal
A catastrophic earthquake caused a massive tsunami which hit a 40-year-old reactor and caused the worst nuclear accident since Chernobyl.
One person died as a result of the nuclear portion of the disaster.
One.
The perfect storm of shit hitting the fan killed one person. Modern reactor design and safety is so much better than Fukushima Daiichi, and outside Japan, there's no reason to build a reactor within 100 miles of a tsunami danger zone.
...while Japan dumps waste into the ocean.
China releases vastly more tritium into the ocean than Japan ever will, and has for years.
https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/news/20230824_36/
KPFA - The Ralph Nader Radio Hour
Nader is a Russian shill who whines about "How much suffering will he (Biden) tolerate being inflicted on the long-suffering Russian people? "
Further we've known for years that Russia will fund any Western Environmental Group that it can leverage to produce more dependency on Russian Oil and Gas. If Nader isn't one of those he may as well be since he's serving their objective.