probablyasocialecologist:srsfunny:Nuclear energy is not bad Whoever made this is bad and needs to ha
probablyasocialecologist:srsfunny:Nuclear energy is not bad Whoever made this is bad and needs to have a word with themselves.“Every dollar spent on nuclear results in one-fifth the energy one would gain with wind or solar [at the same cost], and nuclear energy takes five to 17 years longer before it becomes available.” (https://aeon.co/ideas/nuclear-power-is-not-the-answer-in-a-time-of-climate-change)“Nuclear electrification shifts the coupling from one impact (CO2 emissions from fossil fuel) to other impacts (e.g. biodiversity loss, water pollution, and other impacts related to mining and transport, toxic waste) and resource use (e.g. uranium scarcity).” (https://mk0eeborgicuypctuf7e.kinstacdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Decoupling-Debunked.pdf)“New nuclear power costs about 5 times more than onshore wind power per kWh (between 2.3 to 7.4 times depending upon location and integration issues). Nuclear takes 5 to 17 years longer between planning and operation and produces on average 23 times the emissions per unit electricity generated (between 9 to 37 times depending upon plant size and construction schedule)” (https://eu.boell.org/en/2021/04/26/7-reasons-why-nuclear-energy-not-answer-solve-climate-change)“A large-scale expansion of nuclear power would reduce “elemental diversity” by depleting the world’s supply of some elements and making them unavailable to future generations.” (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0096340212459124)Countries investing in renewables are achieving carbon reductions far faster than those which opt to back nuclear power (https://climatenewsnetwork.net/nuclear-power-hinders-fight-against-climate-change/)The use of low-grade uranium ore (0.01 per cent) may create the same greenhouse-gas footprint as a methane-fired power plant (https://newleftreview.org/issues/ii111/articles/troy-vettese-to-freeze-the-thames)New nuclear plants take from five to 17 years longer to build than utility-scale solar or on-shore wind power (https://climatenewsnetwork.net/nuclear-power-cannot-rival-renewable-energy/)“Any expansion of nuclear power would expose countless more people to the threat of radiation-induced cancer that critical scientists such as Ernest Sternglass have documented since the 1960s, and threaten several indigenous communities with the even more severe consequences of uranium mining and milling.” (https://www.akpress.org/catalog/product/view/id/2659/s/toward-climate-justice/)“There’s no such thing as a reactor that consumes radioactive waste; what they’re really talking about is reprocessing spent fuel … any nuclear fuel cycle that utilizes reprocessing and recycling of spent fuel poses significantly greater nuclear proliferation and terrorism risks than reactors that don’t reprocess such waste.” (https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/advanced-isnt-always-better) -- source link