
U.S. Nuclear Power Plants Weren’t Built for Climate Change - pseudolus
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2019-nuclear-power-plants-climate-change/
======
arendtio
The last paragraph summarizes it pretty well:

> Macfarlane, the former NRC chairman, says the lesson of Fukushima is that
> the nuclear industry, including regulators, needs to prepare for seemingly
> unlikely threats. “Boy, did we misjudge natural hazards,” she says. “If
> something happens and you don’t learn from it, woe unto you.”

------
mikece
Nuclear fission creates thermal energy (which is translated into electricity)
without emitting carbon AND without dependence on sunlight or wind, something
the carbon-free movement should embrace. Yet the same people who are so
concerned about the environment are opposed to recycling partially used
(incorrectly called "spent") nuclear fuel and then complain about needing to
store such an untapped source of energy for hundreds of years. Through
recycling, chemical decomposition of truly spent fuel stock, and other
technologies the byproducts of nuclear fuel can be rendered fully safe and
radiation-free for long-term disposal. I would think anyone truly interested
in a carbon-reduced future would embrace the full possibilities of what the
latest nuclear fission technology offers (especially since fusion for making
electricity will probably remain ten years away for the next several decades).

------
PaulHoule
How is it that this article doesn't mention that nuclear energy is carbon
free?

~~~
imtringued
Taken from the article: "He also notes that nuclear power produces more than
half the carbon-free electricity in the U.S."

