Nuclear Energy in 2019

General philosophy message board for Discussion and debate on other philosophical issues not directly related to veganism. Metaphysics, religion, theist vs. atheist debates, politics, general science discussion, etc.

Is Nuclear Energy Screwed?

Yes
1
13%
No
2
25%
Maybe
2
25%
I don't know
3
38%
 
Total votes: 8

Jamie in Chile
Senior Member
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2017 7:40 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegetarian

Re: Nuclear Energy in 2019

Post by Jamie in Chile » Tue Feb 19, 2019 4:42 pm

Fridges probably use less energy at night for 2 reasons. 1 temperature difference fridge vs kitchen 2. door opened and closed less. So probably not a big deal. When we looked at solar panels I was hoping to get enough storage to run a few hours into the evening not all night.

Repair/maintenance is an issue for anything, but perhaps less so for solar panels than other things.

How about we build 1 nuclear power plant purely to provide the energy for low carbon solar power production. Instead of connecting it to the grid we will run it to a huge solar panel factory next door. Are you with me on that one?

User avatar
GoldenWatch1809
Newbie
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:47 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan
Location: University Dorm at Columbia

Post by GoldenWatch1809 » Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:54 pm

Interesting post, Red.

Although I know basically nothing about Nuclear Energy (Biology isn't exactly going to help build a reactor is it?), I still think it's vital to have Nuclear Energy as a result of climate change becoming an increasing problem. I don't like discussing politics too much, but this is one of the few times where I think discussion is vital, and supporting politicians who don't support it is counterproductive. However, as I know very little about it, I'm not one to have debate it, though your post may compel me to start studying it when University work isn't taking up too much time. I'm not sure if would say it's 'screwed' though as a lot of countries in Europe, such as France, are embracing it to a great degree.

I'm sure brimstoneSalad knows a lot more about nuclear, but is there any literature to catch up on to get familiar with the subject?

User avatar
Red
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 2911
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Toluca Lake

Post by Red » Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:57 pm

GoldenWatch1809 wrote:
Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:54 pm
However, as I know very little about it, I'm not one to have debate it, though your post may compel me to start studying it when University work isn't taking up too much time. I'm not sure if would say it's 'screwed' though as a lot of countries in Europe, such as France, are embracing it to a great degree.

I'm sure brimstoneSalad knows a lot more about nuclear, but is there any literature to catch up on to get familiar with the subject?
Definitely catch up on it, it's probably the most important issue facing us right now.

If you want to get a hold of the literature, read 'Energy for Future Presidents' if you want to get your feet wet.
Learning never exhausts the mind.
-Leonardo da Vinci

User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 9337
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by brimstoneSalad » Fri Feb 22, 2019 4:13 pm

Jamie in Chile wrote:
Tue Feb 19, 2019 4:42 pm
Fridges probably use less energy at night for 2 reasons. 1 temperature difference fridge vs kitchen 2. door opened and closed less. So probably not a big deal. When we looked at solar panels I was hoping to get enough storage to run a few hours into the evening not all night.
The trouble is that a few hours might not keep your food safe. I guess you could do canning.
You don't want to gamble on spoiled food.
Jamie in Chile wrote:
Tue Feb 19, 2019 4:42 pm
How about we build 1 nuclear power plant purely to provide the energy for low carbon solar power production. Instead of connecting it to the grid we will run it to a huge solar panel factory next door. Are you with me on that one?
A single one for the whole world might be an issue in terms of being an actual target for attack, but putting them in the middle of nowhere and then manufacturing solar panels there, and aluminum, and other high energy intensive operations, then shipping those to cities could work.
We could even get on a liquid hydrogen economy to power generators when the sun goes down.

If you located the plants in cold areas, you could also use waste heat to warm greenhouses and grow more food.

Jamie in Chile
Senior Member
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2017 7:40 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegetarian

Post by Jamie in Chile » Sat Feb 23, 2019 3:12 pm

Not proposing 1 for the whole world, but perhaps one for a whole country. If the plant produces more energy than needed the surplus can go to the grid.

What I was looking at was solar panels to provide most of the energy and then the sun goes down and then later when the battery runs out just switch to grid. I wasn't going to get rid of the grid connection. So yes, you would need to keep the fridge running.

If you were off grid you would need a larger amount of solar panels and batteries, or a generator back up.

Jamie in Chile
Senior Member
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2017 7:40 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegetarian

Post by Jamie in Chile » Wed Mar 06, 2019 3:43 pm

Nuclear seems to be gaining a little traction in some Western world media in recent weeks. It looks like a small shift has happened in the public debate due to how serious climate change now is. I think this will be positive for nuclear.

User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 9337
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by brimstoneSalad » Sat Mar 09, 2019 8:01 pm

Jamie in Chile wrote:
Wed Mar 06, 2019 3:43 pm
Nuclear seems to be gaining a little traction in some Western world media in recent weeks. It looks like a small shift has happened in the public debate due to how serious climate change now is. I think this will be positive for nuclear.
That's great. We have seen a few progressive media outlets shift their tunes on nuclear.

One nuclear plant for a country would be a target in warfare -- not so much to cause a meltdown, but to take down the power grid. You'd want some redundancy, but you could spread them out in sparsely inhabited regions.

Although once you built the plant and the industry around it (hydrogen, aluminum, solar manufacture) then it *would* be in a densely populated area because you'd have a manufacturing city pop up there. But since the plant would predate the citizens and they'd all know their jobs depend on it, you wouldn't have to worry about irrational challenge from a frightened population (as in the case of new plants, or renewing old ones in areas that don't use exclusively nuclear power like New York... despite the fact that likely power outages will result in deaths during the next heat wave).

Jamie in Chile
Senior Member
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2017 7:40 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegetarian

Post by Jamie in Chile » Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:01 pm

Just thinking about the post, one good argument about nuclear is that you could build in an area of low employment and poverty to create social justice. You can, presumably, build them in most places. And then you create a technical University in the area or on site, and persuade some higher level skilled people to move there with good offers.

This TED talk may be worth a look on the nuclear debate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-yALPEpV4w

User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 9337
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan

Post by brimstoneSalad » Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:41 am

Jamie in Chile wrote:
Tue Mar 12, 2019 8:01 pm
Just thinking about the post, one good argument about nuclear is that you could build in an area of low employment and poverty to create social justice.
Yes, but unfortunately people's stupidity gets in the way, and instead it's seen as you building this poisonous power plant near the poor who you see as subhuman and you're exploiting them.
You have to consider how the anti-nuclear people will spin it.

User avatar
miniboes
Master of the Forum
Posts: 1575
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 1:52 pm
Religion: None (Atheist)
Diet: Vegan
Location: Netherlands

Post by miniboes » Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:35 am

My expectation:
Renewable energy falls short to reduce GHG emissions, and in 30-50 years we begin to see huge harm as a result of climate change, and evaluation will show renewables have just not been doing the trick.

At that point, hopefully, there have been some major innovations in nuclear energy and nuclear plants being built at the moment are showing their worth (e.g. the huge one koreans are building in one of the arab countries), and a massive effort to build additional nuclear plants begins. The three key actors here are the EU, the USA and China. If they commit to nuclear, the rest of the world will follow. If that doesn't happen, we're in for a very bad century.
"I advocate infinite effort on behalf of very finite goals, for example correcting this guy's grammar."
- David Frum

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests