Seeing as Solar is Nuclear we can`t really say that Nuclear Power is bad per se.
Most, all, disasters so far were human error caused.
However with the available natural forces which can be utilised, along with a sustainable world population of many less than at present, Nuclear Power is unnecessary.

On a full life cycle analysis basis nuclear is by far the safest way to generate electricity and always has been-- i.e. since the first power reactor began sending power to the grid in 1954. And, yes, it's much safer than wind and solar.

Reactor accidents are responsible for a trivial number of fatalities compared with all other technologies.

Here's a short opinion piece on my 2017 paper: https://www.thegwpf.com/what-could-have-been-if-nuclear-power-deployment-had-not-been-disrupted/. It summarises key points and points to the relevant parts of the paper where you can find more on each.

And here are some recently published authoritative papers on the costs of nuclear reactor accidents and what the response should be - in most cases the correct response is to provide correct information to the population, explain the true consequences (which are minimal)and don't evacuate people.

Nuttall et al. (2017) 'Compensating for severe nuclear accidents: An expert elucidation.' https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957582016303032

Thomas, P. (2017) 'Quantitative guidance on how best to respond to a big nuclear accident.' https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957582017302665

Thomas, P.; May, J. (2017) 'Coping after a big nuclear accident.' https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0957582017303166

Waddington et al. (2017) 'J-value assessment of relocation measures following the nuclear power plant accidents at Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi.'https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957582017300782

Yumashev et al. (2017). 'Economically optimal strategies for medium-term recovery after a major nuclear reactor accident.' https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957582017302665

"Rethink"? To do that, the anti-nuclear brigade would have had to think in the first place. They have not done that.

It strikes me as most odd that South Australia has the most expensive electricity in the developed world, is building a gas fired power station on its 50 year old gas pipeline yet has the world's largest uranium deposit at Olympic Dam. At current restrained rates of uranium production Australia could easily produce over 300 Twh a year of near zero carbon electricity in light water reactors. We used 257 Twh of 85% high carbon electricity last year.

Politicians are falling over themselves to promise 100% renewable energy to power everything from cars to heat pumps. I'd like to see one country with modest hydro actually do that. Germany is supposed to shut its remaining nukes in 2022. Let's see what happens. Australia has a vast outback that not only has uranium but could store spent fuel with plutonium for the arrival of fourth generation reactors. Leave plenty of windmills and solar panels for the virtue signallers but let nuclear replace coal and baseload gas

Congratulations on a good, concise article. Much like the bleeding obvious, "Well-off, comfortable, well fed lefties/liberals have stuck their hypocritical heads in he san over nuclear energy for electricity and even more stupidly over nuclear power in submarines (resulting in massive cost and time blowouts).

We sell uranium (and coal) around the world, and indeed the comfortable aussie lifestyles would disappear without such " evil" trades ended. C02 is a global gas, yet we sell it and profit from are sales... we are in fact the "dealer", not the use of the "drug" called coal. Instead, we use up expensive and heavily polluting technologies (solar, wind and batteries use polluting manufacturing processes and scarce rare metals). How hypocritical that we ignore these inconvenient facts, to make pious claims of are green credentials, which is a false as Marie Antoinette's famous concern of "well, let them eat cake, if they have no bread".

Nuclear power is indeed safe, kills less people in all of its lifecycle and could provide cleaner, safer power for billions around the world, while half a dozen could solve Australian's base load power issue, and saving millions of Australian pensioners from power poverty. What this article ignores is simple... the lack of balls from our so called political masters.

We have mainly self serving, greasy-pole climbing, spineless Pollies and we have some fruit loops!! But even if Pauline Hanson, Mark Latham, Clive Palmer, Rob Oakshot...supported/pushed for nuclear power, I would vote for them till the cows come home in a heartbeat.. Hmmm, I doubt I will get the chance...

Ateday,

Once you are world dictator, how do you propose to bring about " .... a sustainable world population of many less than at present." ? Do you mean, to reduce the number of white people who are more likely to be using far more of the world's resources than other people ? Or do you mean those coloured people, fornicating and breeding so irresponsibly ? What are you going to use ? Kool-Aid ? Solent Green (for the older ones) ?

I wonder if there is a pill for megalomania.....

In any case, populations in wealthier countries are either stagnating or declining. Australia's population would probably be declining (or barely rising) if it weren't for immigration. China's population growth will stall in about twenty years, one generation, and decline rapidly after that (four million births a year, even if everybody lives to be 100,k cracks out at a steady population of only 400 million, down a billion from current population, and probably by 2100).

World population growth may be zero well before 2100, and gradually decline after that, maybe by 0.1 - 0.2 % p.a. (any faster may be disastrous over a generation, certainly over two, if you think about it).

And would you be killing off older people, or minimising births (perhaps by making abortion compulsory for certain groups), in order to bring about your particular Dystopia ? Any ethnic groups you don't like, or maybe left-handers ? Thin people ? Handsome people ? Capable people ? Take your pick, Ateday, it's all a pipe-dream.

Joe