Saskatchewan, Ontario to roll out mini-nuclear reactors

Re:Saskatchewan, Ontario to roll out mini-nuclear reactors by evgen on Thursday July 14, 2022 @03:48AM (#32093207)

IMHO the lie is to pretend that hydro is safe or has a low impact when it comes to greenhouse gasses. Dam failures have killed many more people than nuclear even if you throw in the intentional nuclear events at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Hydro would be almost as good as nuclear when it comes to climate costs if they would clear the reservoir footprint before flooding, but they do not and the decaying plant matter in the flood zone adds a greenhouse gas cost that takes decades for the dam to counter in “clean” energy.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Saskatchewan, Ontario to roll out mini-nuclear reactors by OscarCunningham on Thursday July 14, 2022 @04:17AM (#32093411)

How would you clear the floodzone without releasing the carbon anyway?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Saskatchewan, Ontario to roll out mini-nuclear reactors by lrem on Thursday July 14, 2022 @06:17AM (#32094096)

Bury the wood is one idea. I've recently heard that salt water is also good for this. This is why mangrove forests are 4 or 5 times better carbon sinks than rainforests.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Saskatchewan, Ontario to roll out mini-nuclear reactors by jeltz on Thursday July 14, 2022 @08:11AM (#32094884)

But with that logic you could bury the wood, not build a hydro plant and then plant new trees.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Saskatchewan, Ontario to roll out mini-nuclear reactors by lrem on Thursday July 14, 2022 @10:12AM (#32096323)

Yes please.

Unless that means burning more coal/gas/oil...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Saskatchewan, Ontario to roll out mini-nuclear reactors by nixonpjoshua1 on Thursday July 14, 2022 @12:09PM (#32097902)

If too expensive to clear the land currently and so currently it doesn't get done, the economic value could be at least slightly improved by logging the area for the wood if it is mandated to have to clear it first.

[ Parent | on HN ]