I appreciate this thoughtful post. In the spirit of dialogue, may I suggest that in providing energy supply we do not have a binary choice. It is not either fossil fuels or nuclear. All the brilliant minds that have developed and refined nuclear energy should apply their skills to at least two more options: clean energy (solar/wind/hydro) and highly efficient technology that uses less energy.
Of course, there is no truly 'clean' energy, if we look at the cost (environmentally) of manufacture and disposal of energy components. Ideally, we will learn to live less wastefully and use less energy, overall.
Many of us who oppose nuclear do not have an instinctive aversion to the word 'nuclear'. We have an aversion to the unavoidable and virtually immortal radioactive waste inherent in nuclear energy production. We have an aversion to the admittedly remote but still present danger of catastrophic failure. And that failure can arise from events not intrinsic to the plant's operation. For example, NY's Indian Point nuclear reactor was built very near to the Ramapo Fault line. We all know about Fukushima. And then there's the ongoing danger of deliberate sabotage by bad actors.
We don't have to choose between dirty fossil fuel and implicitly dangerous (yes, dangerous) nuclear. We can use the vast resources of industry and government to come up with a saner option...energy efficient technology and renewable energy.
Hope you don't mind my long comment. This is not a simple discussion and it is one to which I have given some thought. I look forward to reading more of your always interesting, and informative, posts :)
I am fully in line with you! The problematics is much larger than naively thought of.
Happy new decade by the way :)
Hi @lemouth, Happy New Year!
I missed you. You're back, with another blog to challenge me and bring me into the wider universe :)
I'm glad you agree with me. I've done a lot of reading, careful reading, and can find no excuse (except immediate financial interests) for continuing down the nuclear path. You certainly have a better understanding of the technology then I do, but this is not something that should be left to specialists. We all live with the consequences.
Anyway, so glad you're back. Hope your little ones had a joyous holiday.
I am rather partly back, but I will try to blog about particle physics again soon :)
IMO, the reasons for using nuclear energy is not only financial (usually, the same companies, at least in France, own several types of plants). It is a choice between polluting in one way or the other (and there is no good choice... at least for now).
There is in fact no need to looking for excuse. All available technologies of today have pros and cons and decisions have to be made. To me, the error is that not enough money is put in research for future, cleaner and more efficient, options.
Just to comment to the last part of your message, I am a bit rusted in how this technology works as my student days in nuclear engineering are far far behind me, so that I am maybe not 100% aware of the new developments and I forgot many things. I have actually never even started with working in this field as I switched gears to particle physics research right after my studies.
Cheers!
PS: I had a few days of offline break between Xmas and new year. This was good!