Related Information to Responsible Nuclear Power

Responsible Nuclear Power

Nuclear power is an industry plagued by fear and misunderstanding, but it may very well be the single best source of reliable and clean power we can manage.

A large part of the problem is that while traditional reactors do indeed have significant safety and environmental issues (Even if we have gotten to the point where the modern designs are estimated about as likely to cause problems as us seeing sunspots forming coherent text messages), fears concerning them have for a very long time stifled research and innovation in that field. Ironically those fears have set back solutions to those same problems by decades.

My own understanding of the field has led me to conclude that It is entirely possible for Nuclear power to safely meet all our electricity demands, while having much less environmental impact than solar or wind would in the same capacity.

For those of us who are ever so slightly concerned with the proliferation of nuclear weapons, this is a favorable direction as well. We mostly get the material for nukes from byproducts of standard uranium rod type reactors. Alternative configurations proposed tend to leave waste products far too inert for such use.

A report on the possible future of nuclear technology

What do people think of this field of innovation?

Power Nuclear Responsible

This is mostly true. It depends on what your view of environmental impact is. All nuclear reactors create nuclear waste. That does not mean neon green goop that will eat through anything except metal 55 gallon barrels, it just means that there are by-products that must be dealt with. The same is true for solar and wind, however, solar and wind only make their by-products once when they are first made. After being made and installed, they have very little in the way of environmental impact for their lifetime (Which is only about 10-15 years at present). I don't think a focused approach to energy is going to get us anywhere.

The problem with our current way of making and utilizing energy is that energy is made in a few spots and transported by a few lines to many many homes. If these spots or lines become damaged or overloaded, entire cities can suddenly lose powers (Or at the very least a neighborhood). What we need for a low environmental impact, but secure energy future is a distributed network of energy with many different kinds of sources spread out all over the place. Wind turbines don't interrupt the flow of wind very much, and only have a footprint of about 10 square feet. They can be placed almost anywhere (In the ocean, on top of a mountain, or in otherwise desolate places like the dessert). Solar panels do cast a shadow, which won't allow anything much to grow underneath them, but otherwise are not harmful to the environment (Except in their manufacture, which is a one-time cost). They can be placed on roofs, in deserts, or in other places where sun shines, but very little grows. With current ~30% efficient solar cells, you only need to cover 331 thousand square kilometers (Or 128 thousand square miles) to supply enough energy for the whole world. For perspective this is the approximately the size of the Sonoran Desert. But we don't need a totally solar energy system.

In order for an energy system to be safe, we need to update our electrical grid too. Currently electricity should only flow to a home and there is only one path from generation to each home. Instead we need an interconnect network where electricity can flow in either direction (And ideally each home have some solar, hydrothermal, or wind energy generator) and have multiple paths from generation to point-of-use. I agree with you 100%, I just don't think it is enough to focus on nuclear, and I don't think solar and wind have the environmental impact you were thinking they do.

Responsible Nuclear Power UFO & Writing Art Education Sciences

In regards to the environmental impact of reliance on solar and wind, don't forget the notable energy storage systems that would be required. Batteries aren't exactly the most eco-friendly things.

But yes, I would not advocate relying only on any one system. I think it can be done, but a balance has many benefits. Sorry if I wan't clear there.

Power Nuclear Responsible

That is very true. I didn't discuss the need or impact of batteries (Or other energy storage technologies). They are quite costly (Both environmentally and economically). I am glad we are on the same page as far as diversifying. I didn't mean to hijack your thread to talk about other things, just wanted to point out that there are other options and a diverse approach is usually best.