Comment Re:Uphill challange (Score 1) 157
>(Or just crazy people who fear it blindly like for Nuclear).
Unnecessary trolling. If you think nuclear is feared without merit, you are not being honest with anyone including yourself.
I am aware of the pro-nuclear argument for the last few decades that failure problems are ALL due to "those old reactors, not the new designs". Allowing that argument to slide, you still have a basic fact that neither the original design manufacturers NOR the investors are interested in paying to upgrade or refit those old reactors... so they stay IN production... and the point about possible safety improvements in new designs is not realistic. Most of these old reactors have been allowed to continue producing well beyond their original lifespan and keep getting exemptions.
The other argument against nuclear is that the private owners assume all the profit, and the taxpayer assumes all costs of waste disposal. The owners simply get to (dangerously) store the waste on-site in ways that were NEVER intended.
There's more to the problem than that, Yuca mountain storage, etc. but the reality is that most industries including energy are not required to fully bond the costs of cleanup... they can simply go bankrupt one day, leaving the taxpayer to fund the costs of cleanup. Since Bush 2 gutted Superfund, it's not like the government has much capacity to clean these things up either.
Did you know that 33-66% of all electricity generated is wasted in-transit?
This is WHY nuclear power builders always never want to build in remote areas... they always want to build nukes near large populations so there is less waste and greater profit.
Despite all this, I am not 100% against nuclear - it has it's place in the energy grid. But most of the time nuclear is proposed as some sort of utopia, if only the crazy people would stop being crazy about it. The reality is that nuclear's bad image has more to do with poor behavior, and attitudes like yours which dismiss facts.
The energy debate sadly fails to ever talk much about conservation, or the parasitic losses during long-distance transmission. Transmission losses are exactly why we need to have LOCAL wind and solar power - not wind and solar farms [which have their uses] - but actual on-site, emission-free power generation. If solar power works in Germany, it works in Maine, Vermont and North Dakota (which also happens to be quite suitable for wind power, local and farm based)