Like you guys I’m sceptical re: “green energy”, it’s real motivation compared to what has been proven to be cheap, and with research and less government bureaucracy could actually been built. I see the same type to issues with nuclear. The designs that are operating are decades old and have been proven to be safe when operated by competent and attentive people. If it wasn’t such a monumental/glacial speed event to get a design approved we could explore the idea of building newer/better (less controls/ more organic fail safes, etc) designs. Instead the bureaucratic nightmare sours the same and here we are.
The same could be said for safe long term storage. It took decades for the powers that be to study and then act on building a site. Then in a single election cycle Yuca mtn was deemed unsuitable and work stopped never to be ever to restarted. I fear there will be no answer to this issue in the cycle of this civilization. It’s a project that cannot be restarted/ completed in a fast enough timeframe to survive the political machine.
When we as a society cannot steer real progress while ensuring reasonable safety, then the long term prognosis is not kind.
I don’t want completely unregulated situations either. History in our country and current events in other parts of the globe are replete with examples of why this is a bad idea.
Judicious balance between likelyhood/consequence and a real long term schedule (ie: planning on operating 50-70+ years) could allow a design that is robust and yet still buildable could be accomplished. But unlike other countries projected here have to have a short term ROI lest they are unfunded.
From post 1, nearly 90% of the NVEnergy comes from NON “renewables” currently and the legislature has mandated (via a ballot question based on lies) the utility have 50% “renewable” by 2030. Wish us luck with that.
Everything you say is true. As a practicing safety engineer I have seen loads of projects where safety was driven to a low level (and some of the projects ended in failure) However I have also worked on our nuclear submarine systems and I can tell you that these people handle safety the way it should be handled. (Hint, put them in charge of our nuclear power infrastructure and see how it goes.)
But we do have a PR problem with the folks who like to quickly show their skepticism and fear.
My contention is that we can order business properly and safe nuclear power could flourish. I have always admitted that solar and wind systems and battery technology can be part of the new power paradigm but should go to the extent that they succeed economically — as should nuclear. The solution is to fix the issue with regulation delays.