There is a great push, disguised as grass roots, pushing for getting nuclear energy accepted.
So much one sided hype about how green and safe nuclear energy is now. How long the fuel lasts.
Sadly, the people pushing nuclear energy never talk about the downsides. They brush aside that mining the stuff is more disastrous to the environment than coal. The never talk about how we have never worked out how to deal with the waste products. (and the leaks and the contamination from the imperfect containment we have now)
Above all, they never talk about what would happen in a real runaway condition. They just laugh and say, we have solved that with "advanced technology". But really, they do not know. No one knows. There are only a handful of nuclear physicists who ever get to work with the stuff. What we get to hear is polished salesman telling us how everything is just peachy.
Just like the auto industry did when they said lead in gasoline was just fine for the environment.
Or the cigarette companies said that tobacco smoke was just good for humans.
The current state of nuclear energy
We are really in the dark ages when it comes to nuclear energy.
To get energy out of radioactive material, we refine and purify it, then we shove it close to each other, but not too close, so that it starts heating up and we take that heat and make steam to drive a turbine.
Or, in other words, we burn uranium up, to heat water in the worlds most expensive and most dangerous steam kettle ever constructed.
They say that they have made uranium piles safe, by mixing the uranium with other elements into pellets, and put the pellets into tubes, so that when they heat, they expand, and too much heat moves the uranium further apart. And so it can thermo-run-away.
But this is incorrect, or more appropriately incomplete. Nuclear radiation destroys its containing vessel. Over time, even the specially designed metal tubes turn into swiss cheese and eventually fall to dust. But before then, things will get ever so slightly out of alignment. The separating materials will decay, and things can go hot really quick.
We really do not have much idea on the long term affects of radiation. On the containment. On the environment. Nor on the people near it.
Actual dangers from nuclear radiation.
So, there are contractors who deal with nuclear waste and stuff (like a coil of wire, left near a reactor) and these people are carefully monitored so they do not absorb too many rads (per day, per lifetime). The have a short time on, and a long time off schedule. Even still, about 50% of the contractors just wont feel like coming to work. They are just have no motivation, in life or anything. This happens regularly, and these guys didn't get too many rads. Something more is happening, and medical science is completely ignorant at this moment about what is happening in the body.
The people saying that it is all safe, no of this, and still say, with a smile, "that it is completely safe"
Psychics who can see. See auras and energy patterns look at nuclear power plans and see dark swirling energy. All of them. Not one talks about the energy around a nuke plant being good. It is dark, destructive. Like a vortex sucking the life energy out of everything around it.
Given the actual effects on people who get near these things, i would say the psychics are correct.
And there is SOOOO much more to learn about this technology and its effects on humans and the environment.
Science is in the dark ages when it comes to nuclear
E = mc² - the famous equation from Einstein (stolen from others) is what all the modern scientists believe. Believes that we can exchange matter for energy and visa-versa.
And this is where we go really wrong. The equation doesn't hold under any actual tests. And it appears we can only go one way. (and also, the speed of light has changed over time, so it is not a constant to use in this formula)
Newton said for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
However, this is not really the case. Currently a thing is being made that creates thrust, by directing microwaves. By certain frequencies, and pushing the energy to the sides instead of back towards the transmitter, you are able to create a force in one direction. (without emitting anything)
In the future, radioactive materials will be used to create thrust. To turn a wheel, continuously. Not burning it up like we currently do. However, science is firmly set on Newtons "laws" to the detriment of us ever moving forward.
Thus, another reason to not burn up uranium in a nuclear reactor (large, expensive, dangerous, steam kettle), and an example of how much more we need to learn about nuclear physics.
So, i hope that you will continue to resist the building of nuclear power plants. My guess is that the "lizards" behind everything want more radiation in the atmosphere, or more destructive energies. Because they keep pushing this, like they push pre-pubescent love.
We have many better options for clean power. However, there is huge resistance to actually using any of these green energy options. We are only allowed to use the ones that are almost completely useless, and will barely, if at all, repay the energy used to construct them.
The new modes of creating electricity will be coming out in small ways. Individual sized units will creep out through all the black markets. And soon, we will think of how stupid it was to even consider the dangerous nuclear energy.
Coal is also disastrous than nuclear but its effects are seen long term. There are downsides to both and a lot of risks when it comes to nuclear waste. But if we just take time to study how to make use of these wastes or to convert them into something useful.
Until then, with Japan releasing its waste waters to the pacific ocean and buried nuclear wastes from Cold War resurfacing as the ice melts, we can never classify nuclear as a completely green energy source. There are more viable renewable energy sources we cam focus on, but they may take more R&D for them to be more useful to the amount of energy we consume.
From my viewpoint, i could make many green, continuous energy plants right now.
But the politicians won't hear of it. Green peace will show up and shut you down.
This is a bad-political problem, not an engineering problem.
I could make California green in a year, but there is so much resistance. Real resistance, like make you dead resistance to getting that done.
There are some new reactor designs out there that run off old nukes and some that run off nuclear waste. They are also working on designs that don't melt down. The Voyager space probes, that have been operating since the 70s, are nuclear powered. NASA also developed nuclear rocket engines back in the day.
https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/01/18/1086753/advanced-nuclear-power/
Every form of energy is going to have some negatives, solar fields destroy biodiversity and leach heavy metals into the soil, turning forests into deserts. Coal kills the miners by 50. Windmills don't work very well, require a lot of oil and massive amounts of energy to produce, so they seldom produce any net energy and they kill a whole lot of birds.
Yes, i know about all these things, and also know about Nuclear Engineering.
They are not as safe as the media says they are. We don't even understand how metals degrade around them. We only have a sorta idea. But, literally, at any time, the containment vessel can just disintegrate.
And this isn't even talking about the psychic energy destruction.
There are many energy sources that are much better, safer, easier and they are almost banned from people experimenting with them.
Wave energy (all we need is a big paddle wheel, but "people" complain about the eye sore)
Geothermal Energy (but all the good sites are regulated, you can't do experiments yourself)
Real Solar (research paid for in the 70s, and then buried.)
Magnet motors. (people still think they don't exist, because there is not such thing as a perpetual motion device)
https://www.physiciansforcivildefense.org/2014/06/11/the-nuclear-scare-scam-galen-winsor/
You might find this worthwhile.