@dajbelshaw re: blight green - i find this bit overly pessimistic. "Geo engineering" is "large scale", but how do we define that exactly? There are dreams like the Sinai peninsula project (linked) and there are restoration projects that have pretty big impacts (like Onondaga Lake restoration). Is restoration NOT Geo engineering? Also nuclear power has a very bad rep. However, production and nuclear waste disposal *can* be safe/non-polluting. amp.theguardian.com/environmen

@epilepticrabbit 🤔 I'd love to read something on how nuclear can be anything other than terrible for the planet for thousands of years?

@dajbelshaw @epilepticrabbit
We can use nuclear weapons to blow up the moon. (That would be terrible for the moon)

@dajbelshaw i mean nuclear is an absolute rabbit hole when you get into it so here's a starter for ten from UN and referencing 2018 IPCC report. news.un.org/en/story/2021/08/1

@epilepticrabbit OK, well I'll see that and raise you the fact that nuclear power stations tend to be next to the sea, and sea levels are rising

theecologist.org/2021/jul/14/w

@dajbelshaw @epilepticrabbit Intario (the Canadian province where I live, with 15 million people) has very quietly been generating energy from non-carbon sources fo years now, most of which is nuclear (and less than 4% from natural gas or oil). So I think nuclear can be a viable solution, if you focus on what works, and not on what doesn't. cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analysis

@Downes @epilepticrabbit What works for whom and for how long? Scotland was 100% powered by renewables last year!

@dajbelshaw @Downes @epilepticrabbit Ultimately some kind of municipal battery-storage, like sodium-ion batteries, might supplant the need for a base-load generation system. But even when countries are "100% renewable" I'll bet that they still generate baseload and just export the excess, because nobody likes blackouts when the wind slows tomorrow and backup stations take time to come online and reach peak efficiency.

Baseload can be fossil ( :yikes: ) , biomass (nope nope nope), hydro (aaaaaah), or nuclear. Nuclear creates the fewest deaths and least pollution by a massive margin. Responsible placement and design matters, as you say, but safely decommissioning a plant as the sea rises is probably easier than with fossil fly ash silos.

I'll grant that Hydro decommissions itself quite nicely, albeit in an unplanned and uncontrolled way that kills lots of people. With these new patterns of blocking rain systems we're seeing in Europe I expect to see a few such events in years to come, or the quiet decommissioning of lots of hydro plants..

Long post 

@seachaint

Thanks, I appreciate everyone's well-informed views!

Ultimately, I guess, politicians will so what politicians do. And we're all agreed that nuclear is better than fossil fuels 🙂

@Downes @epilepticrabbit

Long post 

@dajbelshaw @seachaint @Downes @epilepticrabbit Not sure why some of my replies didn’t appear in the thread. Is that due to different instances being used?

@epilepticrabbit @dajbelshaw A lot of negativity around nuclear comes from propaganda from the fossil fuel industry. (Obvious disasters were avoidable, and three in 60 years is a fraction of fossil fuel industry disasters). I have no doubt that nuclear has to play role until renewable tech is scaled up. The risk of including too much nuclear is “ah sure, do we really need renewables at all, at all?” creeping in. We need renewables.

@TheWayneGibbons @epilepticrabbit I'd argue that individual nuclear diasters are an order of magnitude worse than fossil fuel disasters. Anyway...

@dajbelshaw @epilepticrabbit In terms of direct loss of life, they’re nowhere close. It’s one of those techs that *can* be done better, for sure, but fossil fuel burning has pretty much peaked in terms of how clean it can get. I think the lack of carbon emissions from nuclear is by itself a compelling reason to include it in the mix (unless energy consumption drops through the floor, which ain’t going to happen).

@dajbelshaw @epilepticrabbit (Just to clarify the “nowhere close” comment, direct loss of life from fossil fuel disasters far exceeds direct loss of life from nuclear, in case it came across the other way around!).

@dajbelshaw @epilepticrabbit have a Google for Bruno Comby and the articles he’s written about nuclear.

@dajbelshaw Nice write-up of different approaches. I find myself wondering about the politics of these solutions, and how that plays into what becomes realistic. I’ll check out Vinay’s work for more background. Thanks!

@fivespeed Oh, the rabbit hole goes very deep with Vinay's work and you'll love it

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Fosstodon

Fosstodon is an English speaking Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.