How can that article not mention the "not good" fact of nuclear waste? Somehow it seems relatively easy to estimate the economic value, but how does it contrast to the problem of treating or storing the waste for who knows how long?
Re: Nuclear poweryea_monJuly 10 2015, 14:15:45 UTC
And yet the mercury, arsenic, cadmium, and other nasty stuff which we produce which have no half-lives get a free pass because they're not (normally) radioactive...
Despite the urgent need for low-carbon power, too many 'environmentalists' remain dogmatically opposed to it. Too often I see claims made about nuclear power not being able to provide enough power to the world, but when other low-carbon power sources have their issues pointed out - then it's "every little counts".
Comments 4
Reply
Reply
Reply
Despite the urgent need for low-carbon power, too many 'environmentalists' remain dogmatically opposed to it. Too often I see claims made about nuclear power not being able to provide enough power to the world, but when other low-carbon power sources have their issues pointed out - then it's "every little counts".
Reply
Leave a comment