
r/uninsurable

Ontario’s proposed nuclear plants could cost nearly $300-billion, study finds: Typical residential customer would pay $240-$456 more for electricity per year if plants were built instead of expanding renewables, report says
theglobeandmail.comThe U.S. Has 100K Tons of Nuclear Waste. Why Is There Still No Plan? | WSJ Pro Perfected
youtu.beWhile nuclear falters and fossil fuel's days are numbered, solar is taking off - The Hill Times
hilltimes.comCoastal nuclear that needs water cooling also has other issues...
In fact, peer reviewed models strongly suggest that Sizewell will be almost entirely cut off by flood water at least once per year by the time Sizewell C is built. https://www.thenewworld.co.uk/jan-rosenow-pakistans-solar-miracle-how-the-hell-did-they-do-it/
France and Switzerland shut down nuclear power plants amid scorching heatwave -- "...nuclear sites run the risk of posing a dangerous threat to local biodiversity, by releasing water which is too hot into rivers and seas."
ca.news.yahoo.comSwiss nuclear power station shut down as river warms
swissinfo.chA Global Nuclear Power Renaissance Isn't Living Up to the Hype
energyconnects.com1000% hype. Nuclear is dying.
"Depressing how poor the media is at asking questions and reporting accurately. This has been reported as an Rolls Royce SMR order, which it clearly is a long way from being, no more than an expression of intent which history shows are worthless. But it has a site, it has government backing and I would guess a promise of cheap finance and a power purchase deal that means it isn't exposed to NordPool. But to complete 3 reactors by the mid 30s means it would have completed 3 before the first Rolls reactor is completed in the UK. This would put them in the Volvo position of being crash test dummies for the RR design."
Beach use near la hague nuclear fuel processing plant leads to increased cancer
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.govFrench nuclear reactor stops operating as cooling water is too hot
bbc.co.ukNuclear power is too dirty, too dangerous, too expensive, and too slow to be a climate solution- NIRS talk
As the climate crisis grows more urgent and calls for energy expansion increase, the Trump administration is going all-in on nuclear power, and Big Tech is investing heavily. But nuclear power is still a bad idea.
Fatal meltdowns aside, nuclear power is generally dangerous, dirty, and expensive. From the uranium mine to the toxic waste pit, nuclear power puts our health, environment, and climate at risk at every point in its lifecycle. Nuclear plants require large quantities of water, construction is slow and expensive, and radioactive waste poses a giant threat because there are no good disposal options. These are not the markers of a renewable energy source.
Join us for this virtual event to discuss the history and current research on nuclear power, what the current state of play is in the national political context, our strategy to fight back, and what you can do to join us in the fight.
Featured speakers:
Tim Judson, Executive Director, Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS)
Amanda Starbuck, Research Director, Food & Water Watch
Laura Shindell, New York State Director, Food & Water Watch