DONALD J Annoying Orange IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

[Rykuta]

There is literally no incentive for him to invest in nuclear power if he does not believe in climate change. Nuclear power is great for the environment, but it is considerably more expensive than coal and petroleum.

"Nuclear power is cost competitive with other forms of electricity generation, except where there is direct access to low-cost fossil fuels."

http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power.aspx

I'm pretty sure the real main deterrent to investing in nuclear power is not cost effectiveness or environmental friendliness. It's public opinion. Nuclear power spooks people. I blame Russia.

[Ad Bot]

[Toxicology]

furries are not allowed in this thread im calling the deportation team 6

[SeventhSandwich]

"Nuclear power is cost competitive with other forms of electricity generation, except where there is direct access to low-cost fossil fuels."

I am the biggest nuclear proponent you'll ever meet, but there is no economic argument for nuclear power when you're sitting on trillions in fossil fuels and don't believe in climate change. The lifetime cost of a nuclear power plant might be cheaper than coal or natural gas, but that's not enough of an incentive for people to switch when we've got vast domestic sources of nonrenewable fuels. Nuclear power doesn't actually help our environment unless it acts as a direct substitute for coal/gas/petroleum.

I'm pretty sure the real main deterrent to investing in nuclear power is not cost effectiveness or environmental friendliness. It's public opinion. Nuclear power spooks people. I blame Russia.

That's definitely an important factor, yeah. Shouldn't you blame Ukraine though?

[Ravencroft·]

If anything the focus should start shifting back ethanol biofuels. The hype around it died down dramatically a few years ago due to how inefficient the production process was(occupied too much precious farmland, carbon-negative emissions, etc.), but I've experienced some very efficient production processes on the job firsthand that occupy marginal amounts land compared to that needed for food crops and decrease the need for CO2 spewing machinery. The process has gotten to the point where it's at the very least carbon-neutral and can actually recycle some of those greenhouse gases.

[SeventhSandwich]

If anything the focus should start shifting back ethanol biofuels. The hype around it died down dramatically a few years ago due to how inefficient the production process was(occupied too much precious farmland, carbon-negative emissions, etc.), but I've experienced some very efficient production processes on the job firsthand that occupy marginal amounts land compared to that needed for food crops and decrease the need for CO2 spewing machinery. The process has gotten to the point where it's at the very least carbon-neutral and can actually recycle some of those greenhouse gases.

I'm not up-to-date on this at all, but doesn't ethanol actually increase the greenhouse gases due to the carbon expended by plowing new land for corn crops?

[Rykuta]

That's definitely an important factor, yeah. Shouldn't you blame Ukraine though?

If you're referring to Chernobyl, it was technically part of the Soviet Union at the time of the disaster; though Russian and Soviet are not exactly the same thing, so, I'll leave that up for ambiguity.

I was more referring to the cold war in general and the threat of nuclear attack by Russia/Nuclear winter.

[SeventhSandwich]

If you're referring to Chernobyl, it was technically part of the Soviet Union at the time of the disaster; though Russian and Soviet are not exactly the same thing, so, I'll leave that up for ambiguity.

I was more referring to the cold war in general and the threat of nuclear attack by Russia/Nuclear winter.

Ah gotcha, I see what you mean. I thought the whole negative attitude towards nuclear was over fears of meltdowns and explosions though?

[Ravencroft·]

I'm not up-to-date on this at all, but doesn't ethanol actually increase the greenhouse gases due to the carbon expended by plowing new land for corn crops?

Yeah that was one of the main reasons efforts towards ethanol production dipped so much. The word for it is carbon-negative.
The production of biomass has quietly become more efficient/carbon-neutral when it comes to the amount of land, crops, and heavy machinery needed(such as plows) over the past few years. Mainly because environmental scientists are starting to find ways to extract higher concentrations of the fibers from energy crops.

[Zloff]

i think research is pointing towards switchgrass as the best source for ethanol biofuel: it grows incredibly fast and is not picky when it comes to its soil and environment. obviously, crop yield is higher in optimal conditions, but being a weed, switchgrass is more robust than say corn and does not require fertilizer. not to mention, switchgrass could be used as its own fuel for boilers in the production process, unlike corn which would require coal

both crops require farm equipment running on dino to be harvested and have the initial plots plowed out, but the amount of pollution left at the end of ethanol production with switchgrass is far less than that with corn

[Drydess]

Ah gotcha, I see what you mean. I thought the whole negative attitude towards nuclear was over fears of meltdowns and explosions though?

just the word "nuclear" in general is enough to scare away most people

[beachbum111111]

just the word "nuclear" in general is enough to scare away most people

Or as Bush would say "nucular"

[Daswiruch]

Or as Bush would say "nucular"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushism

[Toxicology]

ah yes the famous song from the metal gear solid V trailer
nukeyalerr

[Drydess]

donald Annoying Orange - nuclear dawn

[Bisjac]

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/donald-Annoying Orange-martin-shkreli-wu-tang-clan-once-upon-a-time-in-shaolin-a7407221.html