top | item 41885299

(no title)

mbernstein | 1 year ago

Nuclear power adoption is the largest force to combat climate change.

discuss

order

Retric|1 year ago

Historically, hydro has prevented for more CO2 than nuclear by a wide margin. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-prod-source-s...

Looking forward Nuclear isn’t moving the needle. Solar grew more in 2023 alone than nuclear has grown since 1995. Worse nuclear can’t ramp up significantly in the next decade simply due to construction bottlenecks. 40 years ago nuclear could have played a larger role, but we wasted that opportunity.

It’s been helpful, but suggesting it’s going to play a larger role anytime soon is seriously wishful thinking at this point.

dylan604|1 year ago

> Historically, hydro has

done harm to the ecosystems where they are installed. This is quite often overlooked and brushed aside.

There is no single method of generating electricity without downsides.

mbernstein|1 year ago

History is a great reference, but it doesn't solve our problems now. Just because hydro has prevented more CO2 until now doesn't mean that plus solar are the combination that delivers abundant, clean energy. There are power storage challenges and storage mechanisms aren't carbon neutral. Even if we assume that nuclear, wind, and solar (without storage) all have the same carbon footprint - I believe nuclear is less that solar pretty much equivalent to wind - you have to add the storage mechanisms for scenarios where there's no wind, sun, or water.

All of the above are significantly better than burning gas or coal - but nuclear is the clear winner from an CO2 and general availability perspective.

UltraSane|1 year ago

That just goes to show how incredibly short sighted humanity is. We new about the risk of massive CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels but just ignored it while irrationally demonizing nuclear energy because it is scawy. If humans were sane and able to plan earth would be getting 100% of all electricity from super-efficient 7th generation nuclear reactors.

masklinn|1 year ago

> Historically, hydro has prevented for more CO2 than nuclear by a wide margin.

Hydro is not evenly distributed and mostly tapped out outside of a few exceptions. Hydro literally can not solve the issue.

Even less so as AGW starts running meltwater sources dry.

porphyra|1 year ago

I think solar is a lot cheaper than nuclear, even if you factor in battery storage.

ivewonyoung|1 year ago

Are you proposing that cars should have nuclear reactors in them?

Teslas run great on nuclear power, unlike fossil fuel ICE cars.

mbernstein|1 year ago

Of course not.