7 Responses

1. Except that nuclear has less deaths per kwh than any other tech, other than big hydro. So if your definition of safe is something other than “how many people die because of it”, then perhaps your objection would mean something…care to elaborate?

2. When you figure in the total amount of energy a nuclear plant makes vs how much carbon comes from those sources, it is nearly 0. The same isn’t true for most other technologies, including solar, which uses a great deal of carbon to make (from electricity, which mostly comes from coal) and has very little return energy per cell (energy/carbon is very low, comparatively). Everything has entropy, you have to take your time and review all the details to make a real opinion beyond talking points.

3. lets not lie to ourselves, nuclear energy is NOT carbon free, getting uranium and refining it in order to get it ready to use in the reactors is incredibly carbon intensive (not as much as coal fired carbon plants) and is getting more carbon intensive every year at an increasing rate because we are out of easy to get uranium, and the uranium left is becoming harder and harder to get.

4. My Dad is a year away from retiring (and not at risk of losing his job by any means) and in amazing health. Last year he kayaked the Grand Canyon for the 7th time. And I don’t have any issue with renewables- they are not going to replace fossil fuels or nuclear power. If they could, that would be awesome, but I don’t see that happening. My goal is carbon free energy. period.

5. Great presentation, Suzy!

6. This is propaganda. She is lying on purpose. She fears her father losing his job, you can tell because she starts to cry over renewables growing to 10%. At the same time, she hasn’t stopped semi-crying since the issue of fearing her father getting sick from his job. She knows nuclear isn’t safe, and din’t say it’s safe. She is propagandizing for sake of her father.

7. great presentation, thanks!