22 Responses

1. You left out the part of where they bury the spent fuel rods….

2. There is a common misconception that conservatives are anti-science. Conservatives embrace what works and is open to the market and is cost-effective. Conservatives do not condemmn science because of fear (of power, of liberty) Many on the liberal-left use anti-science to push an agenda. The only agenda for the conservative-right (who wish to achieve prosperity for everyone here and abroad) is the market.

3. Agreed. Fukushima’s primarily problem was that they did not design the plant for the environment which it operates. Improper placement of backup generators lead to their sustainability to the tsunami that followed the earthquake. This failure in planning can also be seen in the failure of generators at some Greater New York Metro Area Hospitals due to the storm surge caused by Hurricane Sandy.

4. Fossil fuels? Seriously grubbubba? You still think oil or gas comes from fossils?

5. Seriously fast breeder reactors are the s**t

6. Btw, fast breeder reactors could power the earth for the rest of the earths life, and is one of two option currently available to end our reliance on fossil fuels ( the other being to turn Yellowstone into a power plant) because solar and wind have serious problems. Oh and coal kills tens of thousands of babies and old people a year.

7. Fukashima has killed nobody so far anyway, and if it does it would be indistinguishable from any other cause.

8. We need more nuclear power now!

9. Chernobyl was a problem of communism, not nuclear energy or nuclear science.

   Fukushima was an unprecedented natural event that we will not see of a similar scale in our lifetimes.

   Every other one of the hundreds of nuclear plants running today is NOT facing tsunamis.

   Take the long view, people. It’s clean, it’s safe, and with the right economic conditions, pays off. Fukushima is an anomaly, not the norm.

10. Is it not kinda weird that the Heritage foundation is talking about Nuclear Science… is this a sign of hope?

11. I don’t know, I am definitely not pro-Nuclear after seeing the devastation caused by Fukashima. I want to live in America, not Chernobyl.

12. This reminds me of Fukashima.

    Whenever anyone thinks of nuclear, they will think of disasters like Fukashima and Chernobyl. It’s your brand bitches.

13. Its on the Heritage Foundation, it must be a bad thing.

14. Why not us Thorium as a fuel vs uranium?

15. I am in favor of energy INTERdependence. Why? Because the free market tends to draw people together across borders. When goods cross borders, troops tend not to. Free international trade tends to promote peace. Peace through capitalism. So I oppose all energy subsidies. Even those that purport to lead to energy independence. I think energy independence is a bad goal.

16. I’d be fine with more nuclear energy production, as long as it was deregulated.  And notice that dregulation must include the removal of the governmental subsidy of limitation of liability for disasters. This would mean that any private energy corp that wanted to make a new nuclear reactor would have to get an insurance policy or no one would invest in it. The premiums for this policy would be so expensive, that it would probably render any nuclear project uneconomical.

17. I agree with getting the EPA out of everything but as it stands today I do not trust or want more Nuclear Power Plants. The EPA also stands in the way of New Oil Refineries and New Coal Power plants as well.

18. And, if the EPA and green groups would get out of the way, the US could build new, safer, better plants that would be able to withstand or safely handle what happened in Japan.

19. the USA plants are more strongly built

20. This video didn’t teach much plus it doesn’t tell you about all the bad things that can happen, just look at Japan and ask them how safe they now feel.

21. Now make a video on what happens when electricity is unavailable to run the pumps to deal with the decay heat following shutdown. Meltdown. That’s what happened in Fukushima and would happen here in similar circumstances.
    Gen2 plants are inherently unsafe and need to be replaced. No plant that requires external human or electrical inputs to keep from melting down should be allowed. Waste fuel should be reprocessed and the remains should not be stored on site.

22. didn’t teach much really…