Why Renewables Can't Save the Planet
The title itself is a contradiction in terms.
OSE does not endorse the content of this talk, as it is very selective it its use of data and does not appear to show the whole picture (see section below). It is worth watching only to appreciate a pro-nuclear viewpoint and to study the arguments made.
From an ex-fusion physicist (MJ) - there is no such thing as clean fusion, either. There is no human known law that states fusion will be clean, based on first principles of neutrons (found even in the so-called aneutronic reactions) making anything they come in contact with radioactive.
Their Inconsistencies + What they Didn't Mention
- Airblast Noise Makers + Trained Hawks MASSIVELY reduce bird deaths around wind turbines etc. just like how they do so at airports and landfills (See Bird Control )
- They excluded many other storage methods other than pumped hydroelectric storage
- They excluded how This reduces bird deaths near solar thermal towers
- They said photovoltaic panels have a high carbon footprint, this is semi true, but it is like those word problems in elementary school with two subscriptions, one with no up front but a worse fee, and one with up front, but with lower/no fees; each has their effective range
- They neglect to mention biomass, tidal, geothermal, and wave power
Things going for them they didn't mention
- Also it is not an either or, both may be of use depending on the needs of the area (ie remoteness)
- They didn't mention passive safety and thorium fuel cycle fission, nuclear hydrogen production (via radiolysis (in AHRs or in Spent Fuel/ Waste Pools) as newer methods and use cases
- Neutron sources are needed for science, medicine and industry See Here
