Quote:
Originally Posted by srswans
Nuclear power is the best way to replace fossil fuel usage (see IPCC, Apocalypse Never by Shellenberger, etc.).
We can argue about how much humans are affecting the climate or we can just go nuclear and have cheaper and cleaner energy. Gen IV reactors are the future.
|
I am personally anti-nukes.
I worked at the Palo-Verde power plant as a project manager for a few years and learned a lot about them. Palo-Verde has the safest history/track record of any major power plant in the country. It has been online since 1988, and it tool 12 years to build.
Generally, you are correct; the power plants are safe. They have a far safer track record than coal-fired plants.
But that is not the end of the story.
You have to consider the risk-reward. A Nuke plant failure can have catastrophic consequences. A coal-fired plant failure is almost guaranteed to be localized.
There are other concerns, such as waste removal and storage. Bad with coal (coal ash is very hazardous), but it is VERY bad with spent nuclear fuels.
Another consideration of nukes is the cost and danger of decommissioning them. It is NOT a simple thing to do and can take decades. No matter how well we build them, eventually, they do get too old to maintain. So, they are just another form of "kicking the can down the road."
Also, while working there, I learned a lot about distributed vs centralized generation - the pros and cons. The decentralized is to create small power sources locally (neighborhood or even per point of consumption) vs. a big power plant and the massive distribution grid to get the power to the endpoint. Distribution grids have losses that average 22.5%. That means 1/5 of ALL the power generated at a power plant is lost as heat by the time it gets to the end user. That is a LOT of electricity going to waste., But, you and I pay for it anyway. Centralized power generation favors big company profits but is vulnerable to massive power outages. Decentralized is harder for big companies to compete with but almost impervious to outages.
There is serious work being done on what is called micro-nukes. That is an interesting idea that combines the best of centralized and decentralized. But it is a LONG way off.
And, finally, for this post, the time to build and get a nuke plant online can be decades. While the time to bring online a wind farm or solar farm, or hydro plant can be a couple of years - including planning, impact studies, etc.,
I read somewhere that "green" energy can be brought online faster than nukes when you compare kilowatt output because of the long timeline to do the nukes.