Posted on Dec 7, 2023
World’s first fourth-generation nuclear reactor goes online in China
1.5K
79
17
8
8
0
For those who like to badmouth green energy initiatives because China is building all those coal power plants.
World’s first fourth-generation nuclear reactor goes online in China
Posted from scmp.com
Nuclear
Energy
Posted 5 mo ago
Responses: 6
12
12
0
Jack, I applaud you for calling out the extreme progressives and their demonization of nuclear energy. It gives me hope that you might be the moderate that you claim to be and weren’t captured by usual far-left crowd on RallyPoint.
Your wording is a bit confusing though because you seem to be falling into the old far-left habit of stringing words together that have no basis in reality. Are you trying to imply that those on the right object to nuclear energy? That somehow China is a paragon of ‘green energy’ because they brough a 700 MW nuclear powerplant online after 11 years of construction?
If your implication was the first, then you are probably unaware (or just conveniently ignore) that Republicans are the most supportive of using nuclear energy and the progressives that worry a ‘great deal’ about climate change are the biggest opposer of it. A recent Gallup poll showed that 60% of Republicans are in favor of it (37% oppose) though only 39% of Democrats support it (59% oppose), and the ‘concerned a great deal’ climate change crowd (79% of who are from the Democrat’s far-left side) only support it marginally (29% support and 67% oppose).
If your implication is the second, the 700 MW that China gets from this nuclear power plant is a drop in the bucket when compared to the 243 GIGAWATTS of coal-fired power plants that they are currently building or have approved plans to build, not to mention another 149 GW of coal-fired capacity that has been announced but not formally permitted. According to the World Nuclear Association, they have a total of 53.2 GW of nuclear power currently operable with plans for an additional 27.7 GW under construction or currently approved.
Oh wait, China said "trust us, we're going to reduce our CO2 emissions in 7 years". I know that's enough for the far-left, after all, they easily believe whatever someone tells them, but for the rational group, if they actually follow through, then this is nothing more than a store tripling the price on an item before it goes "on sale" for 20% off. Again, that's IF they follow through because as the rational group knows, they don't have a track record of following though with the other promises they made in the past.
You’ll be hard pressed to find many on the right that object to nuclear power as something that can be done now (there are challenges, but they can be addressed with current technology and capabilities). Personally, I support the repurposing of all the shut-down coal plants and converting them to nuclear power plants. The distribution infrastructure is already there for the power distribution and according to the DOE much of the workforce and existing site infrastructure can be re-utilized.
Does it really matter that the one group of supporters want it because it makes realistic sense instead of blindly following an ideology that someone told them to follow? If those far-left progressives opposed to nuclear power would get out of the way of actual progress being accomplished, you might actually find something that both sides could agree on. That’s not going to happen though because the far-left wants a fictional narrative that supports their ideology instead of a realistic solution that could address the issue.
Your wording is a bit confusing though because you seem to be falling into the old far-left habit of stringing words together that have no basis in reality. Are you trying to imply that those on the right object to nuclear energy? That somehow China is a paragon of ‘green energy’ because they brough a 700 MW nuclear powerplant online after 11 years of construction?
If your implication was the first, then you are probably unaware (or just conveniently ignore) that Republicans are the most supportive of using nuclear energy and the progressives that worry a ‘great deal’ about climate change are the biggest opposer of it. A recent Gallup poll showed that 60% of Republicans are in favor of it (37% oppose) though only 39% of Democrats support it (59% oppose), and the ‘concerned a great deal’ climate change crowd (79% of who are from the Democrat’s far-left side) only support it marginally (29% support and 67% oppose).
If your implication is the second, the 700 MW that China gets from this nuclear power plant is a drop in the bucket when compared to the 243 GIGAWATTS of coal-fired power plants that they are currently building or have approved plans to build, not to mention another 149 GW of coal-fired capacity that has been announced but not formally permitted. According to the World Nuclear Association, they have a total of 53.2 GW of nuclear power currently operable with plans for an additional 27.7 GW under construction or currently approved.
Oh wait, China said "trust us, we're going to reduce our CO2 emissions in 7 years". I know that's enough for the far-left, after all, they easily believe whatever someone tells them, but for the rational group, if they actually follow through, then this is nothing more than a store tripling the price on an item before it goes "on sale" for 20% off. Again, that's IF they follow through because as the rational group knows, they don't have a track record of following though with the other promises they made in the past.
You’ll be hard pressed to find many on the right that object to nuclear power as something that can be done now (there are challenges, but they can be addressed with current technology and capabilities). Personally, I support the repurposing of all the shut-down coal plants and converting them to nuclear power plants. The distribution infrastructure is already there for the power distribution and according to the DOE much of the workforce and existing site infrastructure can be re-utilized.
Does it really matter that the one group of supporters want it because it makes realistic sense instead of blindly following an ideology that someone told them to follow? If those far-left progressives opposed to nuclear power would get out of the way of actual progress being accomplished, you might actually find something that both sides could agree on. That’s not going to happen though because the far-left wants a fictional narrative that supports their ideology instead of a realistic solution that could address the issue.
(12)
(0)
11
11
0
Aren't many of the same people that are against coal, also against nuclear reactors?
(11)
(0)
(7)
(0)
Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen
If you use the shotgun approach. There are so many factions within environmental groups that it's hard/inaccurate to make a comment like that. Currently nuclear is still the safest economically feasible method of generating massive amounts of electricity. IMO there really is no way of generating electricity that has zero impact on the environment, it's just a matter of using methods that have the least impact.
(4)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen -
I agree, however "safe" it may be. There are countless nuclear reactors that have been forced to shutdown due to protests and other factors.
Germany is shutting down the last of their reactors while other European countries are increasing the use of nuclear reactors.
"It began as a movement of pacifists chaining themselves to fences outside nuclear power plants. Five decades later, the effort to close German nuclear power plants will end with echoes of the Cold War era in which it began, as Russia’s war in Ukraine is a reminder of both the risks and promise of nuclear energy.
Germany’s three remaining reactors will be shut down by Saturday — ending nuclear power generation in Europe’s largest economy. But it comes as the continent grapples with questions over whether it can secure enough energy to drive its economies and keep homes warm while also reaching ambitious climate targets."
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/14/world/europe/germany-nuclear-power-plants.html
I agree, however "safe" it may be. There are countless nuclear reactors that have been forced to shutdown due to protests and other factors.
Germany is shutting down the last of their reactors while other European countries are increasing the use of nuclear reactors.
"It began as a movement of pacifists chaining themselves to fences outside nuclear power plants. Five decades later, the effort to close German nuclear power plants will end with echoes of the Cold War era in which it began, as Russia’s war in Ukraine is a reminder of both the risks and promise of nuclear energy.
Germany’s three remaining reactors will be shut down by Saturday — ending nuclear power generation in Europe’s largest economy. But it comes as the continent grapples with questions over whether it can secure enough energy to drive its economies and keep homes warm while also reaching ambitious climate targets."
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/14/world/europe/germany-nuclear-power-plants.html
(3)
(0)
4
4
0
https://www.npr.org/2023/12/04/ [login to see] /companies-say-theyre-closing-in-on-nuclear-fusion-as-an-energy-source-will-it-wo
Companies say they're closing in on nuclear fusion as an energy source. Will it work?
For decades, government scientists have toiled away trying to make nuclear fusion work. Will commercial companies sprint to the finish?
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google