I view nuclear as a prudent diversification of energy sources:
What happens if some supervolcano erupts, and because of the ashes significantly less sunlight reaches the surface of the earth.
Presumably, there will also be less wind then.
I am not against nuclear, but I do believe we would be fine without it too.
Plot twist: the computer's last act at the end of The Last Question was just an LLM's hallucination.
What if hackers/terrorist attack the power plants?
What if the operating companies values profit over security?
What if an earthquake or Tsunami hits nuclear power plant?
> What if hackers/terrorist attack the power plants?
https://www.missionsecure.com/blog/cyber-attack-india-larges...
The Iranian nuclear program was also air gapped.
Didn’t stop Stuxnet.
It’s interesting what you can do with USB drives.
And more power plants means more possibilities for human errors.
Wind has down sides like moving parts and requiring giant concrete poors. Birds strikes, noise as well as ground vibration are also issues.
Unless you're vegetarian, or vegan, how so?
The US produces hundreds of millions of tons of construction and demolition waste per year.
My biggest concern with wind is not the blades, it's concrete foundations and perhaps steel. Concrete inherently releases CO2 when produced (from calcining of limestone), even if the energy source is non-fossil. Nuclear also faces this issue, of course. PV doesn't typically use concrete footers these days, instead using steel anchors that go directly into the ground.
There are plans to make lime from silicates, but this is not a mature technology.
There even are efforts to recycle existing ones: https://www.offshorewind.biz/2023/02/08/newly-discovered-che...
In most advanced nations landfilling them is prohibited, and many are now burnt in cement kilns.
Many birds die as a result of human activity. In the US, the leading cause of these deaths is cats [1]. Cats cause four times more bird deaths than the next anthropogenic cause of death, flying into windows.
Cats cause ~1000x more bird deaths than collisions with wind turbines.
[1] https://www.statista.com/chart/15195/wind-turbines-are-not-k...
If your position is that all five of these factors don't impact larger birds, the onus is on you to back that claim up.
[1] https://www.statista.com/chart/15195/wind-turbines-are-not-k...
Edit: this should be Cats cause ~10,000x more bird deaths than collisions with wind turbines.
Don't need to run power lines for hundreds of miles if you have a generator on your roof.
To remove the need for power lines, you also need batteries, and enough solar to make it through winter.
Also, home solar is still subsidized, even in Arizona where it makes the most natural sense. I doubt it'd be a thing otherwise, even if the only alternative were utility solar. But I understand the argument that pollution is an overdue emergency and any clean energy is better than nothing.