EU experts to say nuclear power qualifies for green investment label: document

Re:EU experts to say nuclear power qualifies for green inves... by arrosenberg on Saturday March 27, 2021 @02:37PM (#26604372)

You could say the same thing about any power source though - humans have created way bigger disasters with fossil fuels than nuclear power.

> The cleanup costs of ONE uranium mine alone could buy germany enough solar to replace 3 nuclear reactors.

How much do those solar panels cost once you factor in environmental remediation, EOL recycling, land use, etc.? Since that's the standard nuclear is held to, it would be good to know.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:EU experts to say nuclear power qualifies for green inves... by hanniabu on Saturday March 27, 2021 @02:54PM (#26604510)

Sites of nuclear accidents can't be remediated. They're essentially lost "forever".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:EU experts to say nuclear power qualifies for green inves... by acidburnNSA on Saturday March 27, 2021 @03:49PM (#26605015)

This is highly debatable. There are places on Earth with natural radiation fields greater than large swaths of the evacuation zone around Fukushima. For Chernobyl, see [1].

https://thoughtscapism.com/2019/05/08/what-about-radioactive...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:EU experts to say nuclear power qualifies for green inves... by arrosenberg on Saturday March 27, 2021 @03:52PM (#26605041)

I don't think the evidence supports that, and even if it did, we create the same dead-zone conditions using chemical energy and fertilizers, so I'm not sure why it counts against nuclear any more than it would against petrochemicals.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:EU experts to say nuclear power qualifies for green inves... by stale2002 on Saturday March 27, 2021 @04:22PM (#26605289)

No, thats not true. It is only because people are mis-informed on the actual facts and dangers of nuclear reactors, that we treat them as if they are lost forever.

[ Parent | on HN ]