Nuclear is not clean nor sustainable nor cost-effective

It is time the lies around nuclear power cease.

 

Clean?

Come on. Radioactive wastes? Clean? And without only mentioning them, the embodied CO2 emissions of building, running, maintaining and decommissioning a power plant; the mining, transporting, processing and disposing of the uranium; make it not to be so much of a carbon neutral energy.

 

(note: The half-life of Uranium 238 is 4.5 billion year!)

 

Sustainable?

Uranium is the same as petrol, it'll run out. With all the power plants being built around the world, the uranium will face the same crisis as petrol in the next 20 to 50 years. When we think of the period of time we'll have to deal with the wastes, that seems to be an expensive price to pay for an energy we used for less than an hundred years.

 

Cost-effective?

When considering the whole cost of production of the energy, included the embodied cost of operation, the wind power has been found to be twice cheaper than nuclear power. And it's not the only one! Much cleaner, sustainable and cost-effective, but so little used, are tidal and geothermal power... and the resources are sufficient and near unlimited. Nuclear is only profitable for the ones selling the technology to developing countries.

 

We have so many better alternatives, why wasting time with such dirty energy?

 

Taken on the train to Stirling - Grangemouth Refinery (petrochemical not nuclear)

___

Fr:

 

Il est temps que les mensonges autour du nucléaire cessent.

 

Propre ?

Sérieusement ? Des déchets nucléaire ? Propres ? Et sans bien même parler de ceux-là, la quantité de CO2 rejeté pour la construction, le fonctionnement, la maintenance et le démantelement du'une centrale ; plus le minage, transport, l'utilisation et le traitement des déchets de l'uranium, en font une énergie loin d'être propre et de loin pire que la plupart des energies renouvellables.

 

(note: La demi-vie de l'Uranium 238 est de 4,5 milliard d'années !)

 

Durable ?

Comme pour le pétrole, l'uranium va s'épuiser. Avec toutes les centrales construites ou en projet, l'uranium fera face à la même crise que le pétrole dans 20 à 50 ans. Quand on pense au temps qu'il faudra pour éliminer ces déchets, c'est cher payé pour une énergie qu'on aura même pas utilisé 100 ans.

 

Rentable ?

Quand on considère le coût global de production de l'énergie, l'éolienne s'est avéré être deux foix moins cher que le nucléaire. Et ce n'est pas la seule ! Bien plus propre, durable et rentable, mais si peu utilisées, on trouve l'énergie marémotrice et géothermique... et les ressources y sont suffisantes et presque infinies. Le nucléaire n'est rentable que pour ceux qui vendent la technologie aux pays en voie de dévelopemment.

 

Nous avons aujourd'hui de bien meilleures et viables alternatives, pourquoi perdre notre temps avec une énergie si sale et instable ?

 

(Si vous parlez francais, regardez : www.streamingpark.com/spip.php?article367))

____________

- 1/250s, f/8, ISO400, 125mm

- No HDR. 1 RAW processed in ACR

- Post-processing in Photoshop

  • onurbg 6y

    the ponies are alive..
  • GrazianoA 6y

  • Aaron Bennett 6y

    great image, well done. :-)

    Music to my Eyes AwardThis Image Is Music To My Eyes!
    Music To My Eyes - (post 1 - give an award to 5)
  • Hans Vaupel 6y

    This Beautiful lmage
    Was Viewed ln:


    "I love my pics"

    And your pic deserves a lot more Love!!!
    Post One..Award Two
    ENTER A PHOTO CONTEST NOW
  • Antonio Romano Liscia 6y

    This Beautiful lmage
    Was Viewed ln:


    "I love my pics"

    And your pic deserves a lot more Love!!!
    Post One..Award Two
    ENTER A PHOTO CONTEST NOW
  • Peem 6y

    Superb shot you have captured for this one.!!!
    Very nicely composed. Very beautiful smoke.
    Should be on a magazine cover. Wish you a great time.:)
  • Doruk Şıkman 6y

    This Beautiful lmage
    Was Viewed ln:


    "I love my pics"

    And your pic deserves a lot more Love!!!
  • Yannick 6y


    I saw this in the FaveMe! group.
    This great photo deserves a FaveMe group comment and a fave!
  • The Cassandra Project 6y

    well said, bang on, and beautifully illustrated.
  •  DocBudie 6y

    nice shot...
  • buckdenton13 5y

    I used this photo in a blog post:

    conservationreport.com/2009/11/22/energy-do-we-have-enoug...
    www.conservationreport.com/

    I gave the necessary "Photo source for attribution" and other information.

    Thank you very much.

    Buck
  • Marco Lorenzetti 5y

    I totally agree with you!

    In Italy, 20 years ago, with a referendum we choose to have no nuclear plants in the country, but today, our government is choosing to back on that decision and to have them in order to solve the Italy's energy starving.
    In realty, we know that build nuclear plants is a big businness which move billions of Euro... money which will be catched by the friends of the friends... as usually.

    Ciao from Italy
  • Eric Holmes 5y

    That's water vapor. It's pretty clean.
  • Sebastien Krebs 5y

    From a petrochemical powerplant... hmm doubt it.
    And if you talk about nuclear power, at least, read my text before commenting.
  • Piero Damiani 4y

    I disagree... I love nuclear plants and I would happily live next to one
  • Marco Lorenzetti 4y

    Perfect, Piero!

    I have heard that around Fukushima there is a lot of space and the costs are very low now...

    Ciao
    Marco
  • Sebastien Krebs 4y

    Thanks Marco.
    While you're here Piero, make sure to get a big garden and keep some space to bury a few tons of radioactive wastes since this issue has still not been sorted yet.
  • australianpolicyonline 4y

    Thanks from Australian Policy Online. This pic is our feature image (with attribution) for APO's Environment & Planning section for a week or so from 29 June 2011. See www.apo.org.au/environment-planning (illustrating a report called 'Reducing the costs of CO2 capture and storage (CCS)’)

    PS. APO is a non profit website making the latest Australian social policy research available to the public. Thank you for listing your image with a Creative Commons license.
  • netsoftware 2y

    It's not nuclear factory, and image is shit... basic photoshop filters without know how to use em... Sorry, but 2/10...
  • Karl Williams 1y

    I love your exposition on energy production. I am, however, immensely relieved that you are not in a position to influence the energy policy of this, or any other, country.
12,231 views
21 faves
54 comments
Taken on November 18, 2007
  • ƒ/8.0
  • 125.0 mm
  • 1/200
  • 400
  • Flash (off, did not fire)
  • Show EXIF

Additional info

  • Viewing this photo Public
  • Safety level of this photo Safe
  • S Search
    Photo navigation
    < > Thumbnail navigation
    Z Zoom
    B Back to context