Imagine if the Americans abandoned NASA after Apollo 1.
@John-Sv
Makes we wonder if big oil lobbyists were involved in hyper regulating nuclear energy
@anthonycarl5583
I operated a 500 MW reactor on a Nimitz class carrier. I received less radiation dose operating the reactor than I would being outside. Submariners have left dosimeters on the pier to compare when they get back from sea. They received less dose on the sub than the pier dosimeter did. China and France are still all about nuclear. The waste is an issue, but unlike gas, coal and other pollution generating power sources, you have direct control over it. You know exactly where it is and how much of it you have.
@bingus-t8s
It's also worth noting, that the average coal power plant releases many times more radiation, along with much more deadly chemicals and smoke, than a nuclear powerplant could.
@davidcook1057
The US Navy operates 80 of its most valuable and critical ships on Nuclear. They prioritize durability, safety and high performance. The US Navy started this in 1954. There is no reason to not proliferate this technology into civilian use. Particularly if China is leapfrogging us with double the output.
@VinceTenia
TLDR government regulation strangled the safest and most efficient power source in human history to death.
@Commander-leo
Two worlds “OIL COMPANIES”
@justethan222
One other thing that people have a problem with is nuclear waste as well, what people don’t realize is that we can recharge and reuse 90-95% of nuclear waste.
@Grimpen0
The regulatory overhead is probably the single biggest reason we can't build anything any more, from high speed rail to houses, not just nuclear plants. Nuclear plants are just the most burdened. Counter argument is that many of the regulations do mean we are all safer. Well that's great, zero infrastructure, just roving feral gangs of illerate spawn of single mums
@kreahy2908
nothing beats fear 😛
@bbasmdc
To add to your point on Chernobyl thyroid cancer. Even the levels that occurred could have been avoided if the Soviet authorities of the day had admitted there had been a leak. Iodine tablets are super cheap and had been stockpiled by the Soviets for use in nuclear war. Giving those to the population as soon as possible after the accident could have avoided almost all the cancers. I believe some of the scientists asked for it to happen but it was blocked by party officials.
@ApexofWar_
The one topic I'm actually more qualified than 99.99999% of people to talk about. I like the discussion of how real-time regulation changes impacts construction. Regulation is the Achilles's heel of the nuclear power industry. The impacts it can have on both new construction and operational costs of existing units in an unregulated energy market (ex. energy market competition against the much less regulated combined cycle plants) can absolutely bury the nuclear power industry. I've been the literal reactor operator for military and civilian plants. Supervisor for the control room of another civilian plant. Was an engineer for construction of a newly finished US nuclear plant. Overseeing site maintenance projects at the plant I'm at now. And I've got my eye on an SMR project once the NRC gives the green light.
In 1969, the U.S. was flipping the switch on three new nuclear reactors a year. Fast, efficient, and powering millions of homes. Then, almost overnight, the industry collapsed, not because of accidents like Three Mile Island, but because of a single rule that changed everything. This video uncovers the little-known story of how fear, regulation, and economics killed America’s nuclear momentum. And why small modular reactors might finally bring it back.
00:00 We Suddenly Stopped
01:05 The Radiation Scare
02:45 Your Daily Radiation
04:25 The Actual Result of the Meltdowns
05:54 Linear No-Threshold
07:47 Nuclear Plant Economics
11:09 The Energy Tradeoff
15:55 Small Modular Reactors
