The Remarkable Progress of Renewable Energy

[bilby]

Trillions of dollars nobody has. And by 2050, a lot of existing reactors will be reaching end of life and will decommisioned. We still can't even solve the nuclear waste problem. Maybe we can ship al that nuclear waste to Australian and bury it all in the Outback.

What, exactly, do you imagine the “problem” to be with nuclear waste, that you think we cannot solve?

Is it the number of people who are killed and/or injured by it? The damage it has done to the environment?

What, in your opinion, is this problem that hasn’t been solved?

You keep talking about it, but you just seem to assume that everyone else knows what it is, and agrees with your claim that it hasn’t been solved. And yet, I look around and see no problem whatsoever with nuclear power plant waste. It’s the only industrial waste stream that is completely and effectively managed; If anything, it’s an exemplar of best practice in waste management.

Why do you think otherwise?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

What should be and what is are two very different things. The disencentives to nuclear power at present are great and as long as the GOP remains powerful, the only realistic solution, a massive government program to build, own, and operate a massive nuclearprogram will never happen. And that is that.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Trillions of dollars nobody has. And by 2050, a lot of existing reactors will be reaching end of life and will decommisioned. We still can't even solve the nuclear waste problem. Maybe we can ship al that nuclear waste to Australian and bury it all in the Outback.

What, exactly, do you imagine the “problem” to be with nuclear waste, that you think we cannot solve?

Is it the number of people who are killed and/or injured by it? The damage it has done to the environment?

What, in your opinion, is this problem that hasn’t been solved?

You keep talking about it, but you just seem to assume that everyone else knows what it is, and agrees with your claim that it hasn’t been solved. And yet, I look around and see no problem whatsoever with nuclear power plant waste. It’s the only industrial waste stream that is completely and effectively managed; If anything, it’s an exemplar of best practice in waste management.

Why do you think otherwise?

It is a massive problem. It is not getting solved. End of argument. You knoweth not. Things like this are why so many people do not like nuclear power. Moron politicians that can't pour piss out of a boot. We have been fighting this issue now for 40 effing years.

 

[bilby]

What should be and what is are two very different things. The disencentives to nuclear power at present are great and as long as the GOP remains powerful, the only realistic solution, a massive government program to build, own, and operate a massive nuclearprogram will never happen. And that is that.

So you can choose between climate change or regular blackouts.

Or persuade the idiots in charge to change their minds.

 

[bilby]

Trillions of dollars nobody has. And by 2050, a lot of existing reactors will be reaching end of life and will decommisioned. We still can't even solve the nuclear waste problem. Maybe we can ship al that nuclear waste to Australian and bury it all in the Outback.

What, exactly, do you imagine the “problem” to be with nuclear waste, that you think we cannot solve?

Is it the number of people who are killed and/or injured by it? The damage it has done to the environment?

What, in your opinion, is this problem that hasn’t been solved?

You keep talking about it, but you just seem to assume that everyone else knows what it is, and agrees with your claim that it hasn’t been solved. And yet, I look around and see no problem whatsoever with nuclear power plant waste. It’s the only industrial waste stream that is completely and effectively managed; If anything, it’s an exemplar of best practice in waste management.

Why do you think otherwise?

It is a massive problem. It is not getting solved. End of argument.

If it’s a massive problem, you shouldn’t have any difficulty telling me why. You haven’t even started to present any arguments - you just keep insisting that there’s a massive unsolved (and apparently undefined) problem.

Are people dying, or getting sick?

Is some part of the environment being harmed?

Give me some details.

You knoweth not.

True enough.

So tell me.

Or do you not know, either?

Things like this are why so many people do not like nuclear power. Moron politicians that can't pour piss out of a boot. We have been fighting this issue now for 40 effing years.

Sorry, but you are not making any sense here.

What are the things that cause so many people not to like nuclear power?

Who has been fighting, and most importantly WHAT ISSUE??

You seem to think that nuclear waste (the only completely managed industrial waste stream in the history of human endeavour) is a problem. What’s the problem?

You have made it very clear that there’s a big problem that needs to be addressed. What, exactly, is that problem? And given that it apparently hasn’t been addressed, despite having been urgently in need of a solution for “40 effing years”, could you at least tell me what harms have occurred due to power plant waste in those four decades?

What’s the death and injury toll due to this huge unsolved problem?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

The big nuclear waste problem is not being solved. Because stupid. That is why. It is not as important as fighting CRT. It doesn't get votes from the morons out there in the heart of darkest America.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

What should be and what is are two very different things. The disencentives to nuclear power at present are great and as long as the GOP remains powerful, the only realistic solution, a massive government program to build, own, and operate a massive nuclearprogram will never happen. And that is that.

So you can choose between climate change or regular blackouts.

Or persuade the idiots in charge to change their minds.

In case you did not notice, in the U.S. millions think climate change is a hoax. Thus things like Build Back Better that do represent a start to fight climate change have been strangled by America's conservative politicians. Because stupid. Stupid. Stupid! Change their minds. Until Miami is under water, nothing is going to change any minds.

 

[bilby]

The big nuclear waste problem is not being solved. Because stupid. That is why. It is not as important as fighting CRT. It doesn't get votes from the morons out there in the heart of darkest America.

What is the “big nuclear waste problem”?

You can’t solve what you can’t even define as a problem.

What is the problem? What makes it a big problem?

How many are dying or being injured? What species are being driven to extinction? What environmental damage is being done?

Please, for the love of God*, tell me what this problem is.









*Who appears to be as real as this “problem” is

 

[bilby]

What should be and what is are two very different things. The disencentives to nuclear power at present are great and as long as the GOP remains powerful, the only realistic solution, a massive government program to build, own, and operate a massive nuclearprogram will never happen. And that is that.

So you can choose between climate change or regular blackouts.

Or persuade the idiots in charge to change their minds.

In case you did not notice, in the U.S. millions think climate change is a hoax. Thus things like Build Back Better that do represent a start to fight climate change have been strangled by America's conservative politicians. Because stupid. Stupid. Stupid! Change their minds. Until Miami is under water, nothing is going to change any minds.

I am painfully aware of the existence of stupidity.

It’s not an argument against trying to persuade the powers that be to do the smart things, rather than the stupid things.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Long ago, nuclear plant operaters were assessed a fee to deal with nuclear waste disposal. Which never realily ha]ened. This fund over time grew to $44 billion dollars. A lawsuit finally was filed that ended that fee. The accumulated $44 billion was then dissolved and returned to the general fund. So today we have no money to deal with the serious accumulated nuclear waste problem. Stupidity rules. Can you see now why nuclear power is distrusted by many intelligent people?

Nor are the moron politicians capable of solving the issue of paying the trillions of dollars to move nuclear power beyond the 20% of electrical capacity nuclear now contributes.

Where is the money going to come from? Who can come up with $8 billion dollars for a reactor that won't pay any profit for 10 - 15 years?

Again. 93 reactors supply 20% of electrical needs. We would need 150 new reactors to get to 50%. More actually as older reactors get decommisioned. At $8 trillion per reactor, it is about $1.24 trillion. Does anybody think any industry is going to go into that kind od debt over several decades to do this? It ain't happening, is it? It is simple economics.

 

[bilby]

Long ago, nuclear plant operaters were assessed a fee to deal with nuclear waste disposal. Which never realily ha]ened. This fund over time grew to $44 billion dollars. A lawsuit finally was filed that ended that fee. The accumulated $44 billion was then dissolved and returned to the general fund. So today we have no money to deal with the serious accumulated nuclear waste problem.

What problem?

What is the problem with what is being done with this material right now, that justifies spending a load of money?

Who is suffering? What harm is occurring?

What, in short, is the problem? Apparently it’s a “serious nuclear waste problem”; If it’s serious, you shouldn’t have any difficulty outlining why it’s a problem. Yet you seem unable or unwilling to do so.

You just keep saying what a serious problem it is. But never say why or how it is problematic.

I completely agree that it was stupid to collect $44billion to address a problem that cannot apparently even be defined, or demonstrated to exist in any way.

 

[bilby]

Where is the money going to come from? Who can come up with $8 billion dollars for a reactor that won't pay any profit for 10 - 15 years?

Whether something is expensive is not an absolute; It’s a function of the cost of the alternatives.

As the cost of 100% wind, solar and storage is $ ♾, and the cost of fossil fuels is the entire ecosystem, it seems like nuclear power is a bargain at any price.

Infrastructure isn’t meant to be profitable; It’s meant to underwrite other activities that are profitable.

The national highway network doesn’t turn a profit. But it’s still worth having.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Another fun fact. The two reactors nearing finishing in Georgia thanks to over budget costs are going to cost $30 billions. This is just the sort of unpleasant surprises making desire to start major nuclear projects uninviting.

 

[bilby]

Another fun fact. The two reactors nearing finishing in Georgia thanks to over budget costs are going to cost $30 billions. This is just the sort of unpleasant surprises making desire to start major nuclear projects uninviting.

It’s not really a surprise; It’s the result of deliberate and concerted obstruction by idiots who have been desperately trying to make nuclear power as expensive as possible for no other reason than that they don’t like it.

And at $30billion, they are a damn sight cheaper than enough wind, solar, and storage to give the same output of reliable power.

And I note that you have been too busy looking up “fun facts” to find out what the “serious waste problem” you were so concerned about a few posts back actually entails. Are you happy to concede that no such problem exists?

Is it possible that you really have no rational objection to nuclear power, other than your vague belief that other people probably won’t put up the money for it? If so, isn’t that a decision for those investors (including various governments) to make? Whoever is paying that $30billion is probably smarter than you.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Nobody is doing that. I don't think you have ability to understand any of this. The Georgia project was the project stung by Westinghouse's utter failure that lead to this fisco. The government failure would have been lack of supervivsion of Westinghouse that resulted in catching their massive screwup while it was on paper only. I am going to stop responding to you. You are wasting time. You don't understand the basic economic roadblocks to large scale nuclear power in the U.S. even though I have explained it several times now.

Nobody wants to start a project that cost bilions, and will tie up vast sums of capital for 15 - 20 years with no profit. And most likely will not be finished on time and on budget. There are not the trilions of dollars out there to finance a nuclear project to get most of the U.S. electical needs supplied by nuclear.

This debate is now over. You have lost.

 

[bilby]

This debate is now over. You have lost.

What a shame.

We never did find out what the “serious waste problem” actually entails.

Oh well.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

The lack of ability to successfully and permanently deal with tons of nuclear waste that will remain dangerously radioactive for at least 250,000 years. Obviously this is not going to win friends for the nuclear industry from thoughful and competent people. All the waste from present day reactors are stored on site.

 

[bigfield]

The lack of ability to successfully and permanently deal with tons of nuclear waste that will remain dangerously radioactive for at least 250,000 years.

There is already a successful and permanent solution to nuclear waste:

All the waste from present day reactors are stored on site.

It's not contaminating the environment, it's not hurting anyone, and there's plenty of storage space.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

The U.S. has 90,000 metric tons of nuclear waste. There are absolutely no plans on where it can be permanently buried safely. Yeah, just kick that can down the road. Let our descendents deal with it. Such a plan. It is not getting done, is it? Maybe we can somehow get right winged politicians to get as excited about America's nuclear waste problem as they are about CRT or Don't Say Gay? Or obstructing Build Back Better.

 

[bigfield]

There are absolutely no plans on where it can be permanently buried safely.

Who cares? Just leave it where it is stored now.