Neither does Greenpeace

being aware of agendas is valuable

I honestly can’t take any anti-nuclear environmental group seriously.

why is that?

Like you want to reduce emissions but want to eliminate the best bet for doing so? Have fun with that

well for example, people in europe are still dieing from chernobyl

Chernobyl was badly designed

Really early reactor

look at the japanese reactors that went full meltdown and out of control for years

fukushima

they still cant control it

Also old out of date reactors

it seems like you have very high expectations considering the costs, time it takes to build new reactors, plus the danger posed by them

We should poring more research into molten salt reactors. It will be almost impossible to have meltdowns and the fuel will be reusable.

Reactor designs have come a long way

all it takes is one accident and millions of people can die and it lasts many many many years

Millions? What?

conversation in lounge vc sucks

The pro that Chernobyl had with the RMBK reactor is that it could operate on unenriched uranium

from radiation and such

There are still a few RMBK reactors still in use

@gooeySlimey then why did you join

Those should be out of commission

Tbh

to see what you guys were talking about??

retar moment

Gen II reactors actually are dangerous

icy do you know about cold fusion?

cope

Cold fusion is a long way off

possibly

Reactor meltdowns are uncommon

dumb

doesnt matter

Molten salt reactors are a more workable solution for the near future

maybe so

They are safe, environmentally friendly, efficient

ill have to look into them more

Ye thorium in particular