The reason this cow is sacred to so many of us is because its so important.
My bottom line is that nuclear is a problematic diversion from a move to renewables that will do little to solve the problems of global warming or energy geopolitics and will create substantial new multigenerational problems.
1) False Choice: The choice between nuclear dangers and dead soldiers is a false choice. I have spelled out three specific renewable options that are as technologically viable as nuclear. All that is needed is for them to be incentivized by the government in order to overcome the entropy of existing energy interests. With the current administration, that is unrealistic, but that doesn't mean it's a reason for Progressives to cave on this issue.
2) Nuclear Can't Replace Oil: Since most of our oil consumption is devoted to transportation, no amount of nuclear power will allow us to wean ourselves from Middle East oil. Transportation from nuclear generated electricity requires quantum leaps in battery or fuel cell technology...and neither will be available anytime soon without significant government intervention - again, unrealistic with this administration.
3) Generator Safety: The key to the argument over improved safety is pebble-bed reactors. As was pointed out by the the NIRS, the claim of a fail-safe technology is overstated. While the risk of core-meltdown is eliminated (because there is no core), there is still a risk of radiation release. There is no risk-free energy technology and I submit that the known risks of fossil fuels (while transitioning to renewables) are far outweighed by the catastrophic potential risks associated with nuclear. My litmus test is still: Would you accept one of these things next door to your home? My answer is "no".
4) Fuel Safety: The fuel you put in your "safe" generator has to come from somewhere. Uranium fuel is dirty to mine and refine. The plant may be comparatively safe, but the danger to miners and communities surrounding mines and processing facilities is substantial and well documented. Since a large percentage of the known uranium deposits are in third-world countries, the political dangers to the citizens of those countries and our soldiers is still significant.
5) Waste Safety: Nuclear waste is the most serious issue with nuclear power. Although we'd like to think you can just stuff it back in the ground and forget about it, it's toxicity and longevity mean that stuffing it in the ground only passes on a significant menace for millenia.
I assume you mean "why nuclear is any MORE dangerous..." Admittedly, this is a hard one to defend with an empirical argument. I've been able to live pretty well with CO2 and smog. But the prospect of dying of cancer from radiation, radiation sickness (an especially miserable way to go) or to have to raise a child deformed or disabled because of radiation exposure is, personally, more frightening.
There is also no worst-case scenario at a coal-fired plant that is even close to the worst-case scenario (however remote) at a light-water nuclear plant. Safe nuclear power depends on human operators, owners and engineers. And any system that relies on humans in inherently unreliable.
Again, I think it's a false choice between smog and nuclear. The major component of smog is automotive emissions - which will not be affected by nuclear energy used to supply the power grid. The emissions from coal-fired plants can be cleaned up considerably with existing technology, if only the Federal government would enforce reasonable regulations.
CO2 is a legitimate point. But if you buy the argument that global warming is irreversible, it assumes less importance relative to the other safety and environmental concerns associated with nuclear.
And I would suggest that my "backyard" argument is not NIMBY since I don't want one in anyone's backyard.
The Soviets held a genuine disdain for the environment, and largely saw no wrong in killing or mutating a few hundred thousand people. Hell, that was progress versus what was done under Stalin!
Clean energy like wind and solar power is an untapped resource that creates jobs without the pollution. Why not use it?
