Nuclear Power Is Being Abandoned Worldwide

Abandoned Construction of Nuclear Power Plant


Despite the Government’s Best Efforts to Prop Up and Bail Out the Nuclear Industry … It’s Failing

As we noted in May, the American “Nuclear Renaissance” is over, “the change in nuclear’s fortunes is staggering”, and a horrible “cauldron of events” has [brought] the nuclear push to a standstill”.

Even though the American government has done everything possible to encourage nuclear power – by wholly subsidizing nuclear power, reducing safety standards after Fukushima, forcing Japan to re-start its nuclear program, covering up the severity of the Fukushima accident, raising acceptable radiation limits and agreeing to buy radioactive Japanese seafood – the number of nuclear plants worldwide and percentage of electricity provided by nuclear is declining.

The Economist reports:

The [nuclear] industry’s role in electricity production is continuing to decline, according to this year’s World Nuclear Industry Status Report, a compendium of analysis and data by the activist and expert Mycle Schneider. The number of reactors peaked in 2002 at 444, compared with 427 today. The share of electricity they produce is down 12% from its 2006 peak, largely because of post-Fukushima shutdowns in Japan. As a proportion of all electricity generated, nuclear peaked in 1993 at 17% and has now fallen to 10%. The average age of operating plants is increasing, with the number over 40 years old (currently 31 plants) set to grow quite rapidly.

This is no loss. Nuclear power is expensive and bad for the environment. And – no matter what you may have heard – it does not help reduce carbon dioxide.

But the answer is not fossil fuels, either … it is decentralization.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Westcoastliberal

    And it’s not an industry without substantial back-end costs. More & more people are figuring out they’ve been lied to about Fukushima and Nuke power in general, not to mention the mess in WA with “leaking tanks”. All the Nuke plants have highly dangerous and almost everlasting radioactive rods stored on-site, and most are near high population areas and a water supply.
    As the public opens their eyes about Nuke power and the consequences, they’ll demand these plants be cleaned up and no more built.

    • davidgmills1

      Not the solution to the nuclear waste problem. The solution to the nuclear waste problem is to build reactors, such as Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors, which can burn up the existing nuclear waste stockpile, including the waste from dismantled nuclear weapons. Watch the video I posted above.

      • Tonto

        I’m glad you’ve solved the problem of nuclear waste, Mr. Genius, because they’re burning the nuclear waste pile in Fukushima today, aren’t they.

        Go ahead, start spouting off again in sixties style, about clean, safe nuclear energy.

        I suppose we’re all to take Fukushima as a learning-lesson? Well, the lesson to be learned from Fukushima is that all these know-it-all, genius-gods of science are full of shit.

        • davidgmills1

          It wasn’t the scientists. It was the bean counters who looked for a cheap way to do a safety program. Safety is always expensive and bean counters always think a problem will never happen to them, so they refuse to spend money on safety.

          But Tonto, the Lone Ranger is calling. Time to for you to go.

          • Tonto

            It wasn’t the bean counters who did not account for the immoveable problem of the infinite complexity of reality. The bean counters only did what human nature predicted they would do. The scientists -totally ignored- reality, and went ahead and made another huge scientific mistake in an immoral effort to claim fame and fortune.

            There are consequences for such conduct in a civilized society.

          • davidgmills1

            You have been watching too many sci-fi movies. You are wasting energy, probably generated by the energy you seem to hate. Turn off the computer, and go pound a piece of flint.

          • Tonto

            You are repeating yourself. You’ve lost the argument.

          • davidgmills1

            I don’t think so Mr. Righteous man. Man who sees God in everyone. Man who tells us all of our immorality. Man of faith. You haven’t made a scientific argument yet. You obviously have not studied basic physics or chemistry or biology and it is quite obvious by the arguments you make. Maybe you think the earth is 6000 years old as well. Time for a fireside chant to the spirits you believe in.

          • Tonto

            Here’s the argument, Klingon bum-boy.

            Reality is infinitely complex. And your science has absolutely no way to predict the future results of what would happen with thorium reactors in every neighborhood.

            Thorium is a dangerous poison. And you want to refine it and spread it around all over the place. You are a fruitcake who proclaims your own omniscience. You say this is the solution. You have no way to know if it is a solution any more than any previous scientific advocate of nuclear energy. You are selling the same old, safe, clean nuclear energy lie.

            You claim to have a solution. When really what you are saying is, let’s make a really dangerous gamble based on the fantasy solution I have dreamed up.

            Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo! Cuckoo!

            You are a complete nutcase. There’s no debate about the merits of your idea. It’s the idea of a fraud artist intent on proving his superiority by spouting scientific gobbledegook. Put it in the water supply, it’s safe!

            I’m neither swayed nor impressed. Your type are as common as bleary-eyed kids who watch too much television.

  • Tonto

    I think it’s more a matter of Big Science being abandoned. Genetic engineering and Monsanto are on the ropes too. Drilling in the Gulf of Mexico is losing favor. NASA is just about completely abandoned. The particle accelerator in Texas is a ghost memory now. There is very little real science going on that isn’t under some sort of pressure, either fiscal or ethical, mostly the latter which is being reflected in career choices.

    Look at Bill Gates’ effort to tackle disease worldwide. He’s blown a mountainous wad of cash, and his successes are nil. His popularity has waned.

    The infinite complexity of reality is what insures Big Science will fail every time. There are no Big Science success stories. In science the old saying, the bigger they are the harder they fall, really applies wholesale. Look at the broken down nuclear reactors in the article images.

    There never has been a machine made yet, that doesn’t break down.

    And we’d all better hope it stays that way too. Science is a fraud for delivering truth. There’s no truth in science. It’s all just a charade.

    • wunsacon

      I was sorta appreciating your constructive criticism until this exaggeration:

      >> Science is a fraud for delivering truth. There’s no truth in science. It’s all just a charade.

      Science — big and small — created the technology you used to type that sentence and make it available for reading all across the globe. It eradicated many serious diseases. It … oh, it’s pointless to go on, really, because surely you can think of many examples on your own.

      • Tonto

        “It [science] eradicated many serious diseases.”

        Name one. You’ve been duped. You wouldn’t know truth if it bit you in the face.

        Science, like all cultural puffing is merely intended to shape public opinion. Science delivers no lasting truths whatsoever. Zero. Nada.

        Name one lasting truth science has given humanity. Trust me, you’ll either come up empty handed and confused, or you’ll make a damned fool out of yourself trying to name a scientific truth that is lasting.

        Science is a fraud. Science cannot account for the infinite complexity of reality that completely rules the cosmos. From the smallest of the small, to the largest of the large, and, everything in between, scientific explanations are mere fantasy.

        • davidgmills1


          • Tonto

            Polio Outbreak In Somalia Jeopardizes Global Eradication


            The article is dated Jun 20, 2013.

            And science in the meantime has made more virulent a great many diseases that were not even known before modern medicine.

          • davidgmills1

            No virus is going to be completely eradicated. If complete eradication is your standard then your standards are not reasonable.

          • Tonto

            It was the poster who claimed “eradication of many serious diseases” by science.

            Eradication means, getting rid of something completely.

            Furthermore, YOU obviously know how small a virus is. There is enough polio virus in one person to infect the entire world and numerous species with polio. There are many difference strains of polio virus. And the maintenance of the standard you proffer, a standard of temporarily fending off diseases with modern medicine applying immoral pragmatism, this is only creating more diseases better able to cope with everything thrown at them by modern medicine.

            You’re parsing words well out of your field of study, trying to defend science.

            Why not try to give us ONE example of science benefiting mankind, now and more importantly, in the future. Go ahead. You will see. You cannot even defend one scientific invention without rhetorical gimmickry.

            I will go so far as to say you cannot even list one categorical truth. Your scientific world is a world of dimply, shape-shifting mirrors. Science is a fraud, all of it. And you are just a classic example of s scientific joke.

          • davidgmills1

            You just defend religion so there is no point in arguing with you. To you everything is religious or of the spirit world. I reject that world. Profoundly reject it.

          • Tonto

            What are you talking about? Can’t you read?

            I said nothing about religion. You’re the one pretending to be a god.

          • UnicornsNeverLie

            You would quote NPR as a source? LOL!!! Why not quote RT as a source too? Or I would suggest that the polio story is an attempt to push more contaminated polio vaccines on that country to further sicken the population, and increase industrial colonization (“rare” Earth metals? oil? gold?). Because vaccines made from minced monkey kidneys don’t contain wild viruses, right? I agree with Tonto, science hasn’t brought as many fixes as it has brought so many problems. If you kill the land/oceans/air, you kill yourself! And for what? A monetary system based on an equal amount of fraud? A cancerous economic system that depends on growth? (Only a DISEASE depends solely on growth!) But don’t think for one moment I’m for any kind of socialism/communism. I’m more for anarchy (an-archy = without rulers). The Japanese have already made a prototype car that can run on any type of water, WATER! But because you’re a tool, I know you’re going to try to debunk this. The whole thing is about the oligarchy centralizing power, IE: ENERGY! Obviously, energy in the form of electricity and combustible fuels is fundamental to most current societies on this planet. And to control them, and their growth, the oligarchs feel it absolutely imperative to control their energy sources. What you are witnessing today is faction wars over the integrating power structures, in their conflicts for dominance in globalization, fighting for who gets what, and “pecking order,” as they try to create a world government. It will obviously never work, too many different cultures, lifestyles, languages… It will never work. The people who were supposed to be leading us and managing the planet and it’s resources, they’ve gone AWOL and decided instead to party and indulge and horde. Those who fail their duty suffer the consequences.

          • evodevo

            When is the last time you watched a loved one die of tetanus? Typhoid? Scarlet fever? Science research is what led to the rapid decline in these former killers (as recently as the 1930’s). Science and technology are morality neutral – they can be used for good or ill. I would look to greed/lust for power as a causative mechanism for their mal-deployment, and oppose that, rather than take a Luddite position of “all science is bad”. You’ve been watching too many Frankenstein movies.

          • Tonto

            Yes, there have been some declines in deaths in the U.S. and other “advanced” countries. We have had an equal rise in over-population too, and an accompanying decline in both the standard of living and the average intelligence of humanity.

            And in the process of facilitating these temporary medical-incidence declines these organisms have been made stronger, more resilient. You see, there really has been no progress made, not if we measure progress by asking, are we making the world better for the future? Modern medicine is only stealing a small gain for some, today, from the prospects of life in the future.

            Just think how few can afford medical care in the U.S. today. Medical care is the biggest cause of bankruptcy in the U.S. Is this progress? It used to be, everyone could afford to get an arm set when they broke one. Now, getting an arm set will drive a whole family into bankruptcy, and make them homeless.

            Selfish? I would definitely say so. But hey, that’s your choice.

            But it’s not your choice to destroy the world. And that is what nuclear power advocates have been doing. They have been destroying the world, large swaths of it.

    • tfb

      Science IS truth. Now turn off your computer (a complete lie by your line of reasoning), and go live under a rock.

      • Tonto

        It would be far better to live under a rock than to die from Fukushima radiation poisoning, a drone attack or from some disease made possible by modern medicine…

        • davidgmills1

          Be my guest.

          • Tonto

            Is it you contention that you have the right to invite others to live in the world as you would have it? Thank you, God.

          • davidgmills1

            No, I was inviting you to live under a rock. You also seem to have some kind of God complex.

          • Tonto

            It is you who thinks you have the right to reshape the world with your reckless science so that there is no place left to survive, but under a rock. You want the right to play god. You want everyone to believe you have all the answers. Omniscience is only accorded to god-like creatures.

            Reality is infinitely complex. And yet you claim to have answers and knowledge enough to allow you to morally gamble with the future of the world. Bullshit.

            You claim to be smarter than all those previous scientists who gave us safe, clean nuclear energy at Fukushima.

            But in fact, is it obvious you are nothing more than a self-promoting, online, scientific, bullshit artist, exactly like all the rest of the scientists in the world.

            You are a cheap knowledge fraud.

          • davidgmills1

            You and your God thing. Has no place in science so it is pointless to argue with someone about facts who deals in the spirit world. Fukishima is a serious man made tragedy. Man makes those some times. But that does not mean all scientific investigation should cease every time we have a tragic outcome. Probably the first person to use fire got burned. Should we abandon fire as well?

          • Tonto

            Explain to me the change in the “scientific process” of Fukushima (and a long list of other atrocities), and what you are talking about. There has been no knowledge breakthrough. There are just being ballyhooed more pragmatic fixes being suggested by scientific fame-seekers. This is the same old story. Go tweek some other world.

            I see no changes having been made in the scientific process since Fukushima. You are just an apologist for an ongoing scientific calamity that is destroying the world.

            And your idea that “all scientific investigation” doesn’t have to end with “a tragic outcome” is clearly not grasping the problem. The problem is reality is infinitely complex. That being true, the solutions of science are always only going to be hackneyed changes. There have been no scientific successes for humanity, and there will be none. There are only abominations created by science, abominations that destroy, and reduce the capacity of humanity to survive on earth.

            Name ONE scientific success, if you think you have one. I am talking about something science provided that has actually made for a better world. Be careful because over-population is one of the downfalls of what science has created!

          • davidgmills1

            I was going to say the internet, but you are making it clear that the internet may not be such a good thing after all. What a waste of bytes. I am used to people like you — disinformationists and paid propagandists. Who is paying you? You use a pseudonym and refuse to stop posting long after an argument is over. Just come to a thread and waste everyone’s time. I am done. Someone else can take over and deal with your religious and faith based arguments.

          • Tonto

            You’re nuts. You have an agenda. Your arguments are that I am a paid shill, and that I am a religious intelligent design advocate.

            Poppycock. You are the one with the bizarre religious beliefs. Science for you is a religion. You think you have the right to drag everyone in the future up onto the alter of science you pray at, and cut out their chances for any future, or, degrade the future in some bizarre trial and error scheme surrounding thorium nuclear reactors in every neighborhood. That’s just nuts. And you know it.

            You are willing to risk shutting the door to humanity forever in an attempt to prove you are the genius that can chart a dangerous course for the future through troubled times. Look at the electrons floating around your head in that YouTube piece. You have painted your self as a scientific-fruitcake-messiah-wannabee.

            You should look in the mirror. You are a scary sight.

            All I am saying is, you and all the rest of the Star Trek – Richard Dawkins types are dangerous quacks who are responsible for a great deal of suffering on this planet. Your science is not science at all -by your own definition. Your science is witchcraft born of television sci-fi shows. Science is not, and has never been, about taking suicidal risks to prove genius-ness. Thorium is a dangerous poison. And you know damned well, thorium should not be spread around every neighborhood as if it were some benign agent of positive change.

            Get real, turkey. No one is following the cult of David G. Mills except like minded religious zealots who worship at the alter of flake-science. Beam this turd up, Scotty.

            David G. Mills, go back to studying your Klingon Dictionary. And take your damned plastic laser saber with you. LoL

          • UnicornsNeverLie

            Wow, Tonto. You are brilliant. And you should be more cautious. Do you remember what happened to geniuses in the soviet union? “Don’t build your house next to the Prince’s castle.” “Don’t be smarter than the boss.” lol. It is your choice, as always. But people like you will be needed to help rebuild after the current paradigm is survived. It is somewhat selfish to argue with idiots just for the sake of being correct. You should know by now that you cannot help them, anymore than they can help themselves. Move your chess pieces wisely, always think ahead. I know its easy to get caught up in the emotional waves of tools such as almost everyone else who posted comments on this article, and you can see that they each have their agendas. However, I suppose it might also be important to have a counter-current to such tools and their agendas being posted. So that innocent bystandards might not absorb false information. I’m looking at my vitamins wondering why magnesium oxide would be in there, it doesn’t seem like it would be bioavailable, it seems more like burned magnesium ash, probably a waste product of some industrial process. And why are iron fillings in some cereals such as Shredded Wheat/Frosted Mini-Wheats…

            I hope you are getting the picture. I know at times the frustration mounts and it feels necessary to scream out, “ENOUGH! I’M MAD AS HELL AND I’M NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE!” But please remember that it may be more intelligent to save yourself for when you can do some real good, make some real change. And the comments section may not be that place. Perhaps get a Geiger Counter (Radation Meter) and go prove what the EPA and FDA are affraid to reveal. Do whatever you can. All empires fall. This is historical fact. Think about how much good you can do elsewhere. Comments sections are useless. Perhaps a few quick facts which shatter the fallacies, but getting absorbed into arguments on here is totally useless. And isn’t good for health.

  • I wonder what its being replaced with? We certainly aren’t diminishing our demand for electricity that I know of. Hopefully wind and solar I suppose.

    Looks like Bill Gates Is Beginning to Dream the Thorium Dream

    and Long Live Nikola Tesla!!

    • davidgmills1

      Man that is good to see.

      • Tonto

        Yeah, rah, rah, rah for the guys who gave us Fukushima, you friggin bird-brained scientific idiot.

        The YouTube picture above is a picture the fruitcake posting here, David G. Mills. David G. Mills created this picture of himself, with a halo of electrons floating around his God-on-earth head. He’s God on earth! Really, David G. Mills is the scientific messiah! He’s the scientific Christ! Bow down before the genius who can make a YouTube video showing elections floating around his head in a halo!

        Well, hell yes! Thank you, Mr. Electron GOD! You’ve made your point abundantly clear.

        • davidgmills1

          Electrons? I doubt you know what they are.

          • Tonto

            And I suppose you do know what electrons are. You make me laugh, clown.

          • davidgmills1

            have you ever taken a chemistry course?

          • Tonto

            You’re repeating yourself again.

    • Jack Richards

      a) They’re not all confirmed… or built.

      b) At present rate of attrition, twice that many will have been retired or mothballed before the last one proposed has been finished.
      c) Not so much a dream, as a vision.
      d) Stop drinking the nuclear “kool aid”.

      • I believe we need to continue with Hansen’s 4G reactor research to burn the world’s nuclear waste because we cannot safely store it for 10,000 years when we can’t even ensure our survival for the next 100 years. It cannot be hidden or safely stored, but 4G reactors promise to burn 99% of it. The important thing to remember is that anything you and I have to say will not matter. I spent 40 years against nuclear power to no avail. I do not expect to change minds.

        • davidgmills1

          Thorium reactors would do exactly what you describe. We have the nuclear waste and we need to get rid of it. Thorium is a much better element for civilian power than uranium which is much better than thorium for military use.

          • Tonto

            This guy is Mr. Has-All-The-Answers, isn’t he?

            Both thorium and uranium are deadly poisons that once released into the environment are impossible to contain. And you talk of “better”?

            Better than what? What is better than the earth? Huh? What you claim you can make of it, God?

            I, and a whole lot of other people, live here too. So, forget about playing God. I don’t believe you. I don’t think you’re a god who can make a better world.

            Think of what your kind with your beliefs have made of thew world recently! And, forget that! Just settle down, and live your life within certain moral restraint, or you may just find yourself locked up to protect society from your dangerousness, Mr. Cuckoo “Has-All-The-Answers” Scientist.

          • davidgmills1

            So you accuse everyone of being God. Is that all you got? Perhaps you should find a rock and start banging on a piece of flint.

            By the way, I am not a member of the scientific community. Just a lawyer who has worked with scientists all my life. But I do understand and appreciate the scientific method. You are apparently clueless as to what it is.

          • Tonto

            You are not fit to make judgments about what anyone else should do with their lives. You know nothing of truth. You are nothing more than a temporal automaton belching oral crap about your self-professed omniscience.

            Go ahead, Mr. Esquire To the Scientists of the World. Tell us the end result of letting scientists tinker with the world we all share and depend upon for sustenance.

            The scientific method is a fraud and a dangerously bad joke. There is zero logic behind science. How logical is it to let scientists destroy the world? The scientific method is nothing more than a batch of crude approximations that enable trial and error and predictions based on the results in an infinitely complex reality that defies our description.

            You win nothing claiming to be a lawyer. Even your rhetoric is blase and inferior.

          • davidgmills1

            And who are you that we should listen to? You would not even answer my question about whether you have ever even had a chemistry course.

          • Tonto

            State for facts, Klingon. I just want the facts. If you want to play forty-questions, then answer this, Have your stopped studying Klingonese, now that you’ve become so proficient speaking it?

          • Bung0

            The scientific method is a fraud? Did you really type that? My god, you are the perfect example of the burden on society Reagan’s defunding of mental health has wrought. And as a life long Trekkie, please don’t tarnish it’s name by associating your insane self with any aspect of it. Thanks, and toddle off now.

          • Bung0

            I see you type insane nonsense on other websites too. Good to spread the love!

          • A world full Teslas is insane indeed mad clown boy

          • Bung0

            Yes, that world would be insane. Also highly improbable, but I love the vortex of madness that is your imagination! Please, do keep it up, I plan to follow your downward spiral with much entertainment.

          • Actually BungHole I admire your adhominen style, even if you are a member of the insane clown posse.

          • Bung0

            Oh no, nothing as trite as simple ad hominem (notice the space). I much rather use the actual truth in my ridicule and scorn of the willfully insane. Now, as for ICP, I am simply a rank and file Juggalo, though I appreciate the compliment! Now then, please do continue to describe the world and various issues as you see them.

          • your truth, no one elses

          • Bung0

            Ha, awesome!

          • if you think that’s crazy, click on the word Shizel, then click on voodroom.weebly, this is where crazy gets piled on crazy.

          • Bung0

            Naa, I’m a man of simple tastes. I’ll just have my fill of your particular brand of crazy right here. In fact, I’ll take a double if you please.

          • Natalia & Igor Speak!!

            The folks in the super-monster buildings do not “give” power, it is antithetical to their raison d’être. They just spent ten years preparing to lock up greenies, blackies, brownies, pinkies whatever. Watching the arctic dry up and blow away is worth 10 uber geek climate models. This is the whole point as the snow melts as fast as the ice, you get methane from both land and sea. All the methane charts point to the Siberian Sea explosion. The magnetic pole shift is accelerating as the tremors release even more methane. This is called an unpredictable discontinuity, which is geek for holy fuck. We have to burn emission free nuclear waste and base a new world e-currency on private no-split carbon e-dividends. Free money on your phone or debit card worldwide.
            This is not rocket science, it’s just common sense not dreams. We have to do this because earth’s ecological life web is ebbing and dissolving into a rather unpleasant decent into a hostile ecology inimical to life. A hostile earth. We will need to power fortress cities. Solar and wind won’t hold up in the new storms that are coming. We cannot rule out anything. There is a lot work ahead, so spread the word and let’s get to it. Thank you for your time.


          • here’s a recent post about tar sands:
            We Canadians have had a secret leak of tar sands oil just popping out of the ground where it wasn’t supposed to be right next to our fracking operations, It was a gazillion gallons covered up by the provincial government since like the stone age. So, if that’s the help America needs, they came to the right place.

            You want help? Look in your own backyard. With new molten salt thorium reactors, the folks at M.I.T. have devised new means to get power safely burning nuclear waste. We can get emissions free power burning nuclear waste. The U.S. has enough waste to last 300 years. After that we can filter uranium from the seas for a billion years. We have to take responsibility for nuclear waste now, we can’t risk storing it expensively for like 10,000 years. We are going to need steady reliable mega plants for our cities as we enter an ecologically hostile epoch. Yes, we will need solar, wind and everything else in the post peak oil world. Use your brains. How long do you think solar and wind power will hold up in the new era mega-monster storms? I remember a solar power workshop, where the instructor demonstrated that solar panel efficiency drops 80% when you shade one single cell with your hand. Do you know how often windmills break down? That’s why you always see photos of technicians standing on top of them. Don’t believe the hype, as oil gets expensive and scarce, China and India will burn more coal. We don’t have time to run the world on solar and wind. GE sells solar and wind power for money and nothing else. They’re the ones who got us into this nuclear nightmare to begin with. Grow up, face reality and deal with it. There are 60 new nuclear plants underway right now. Your feelings won’t change a thing.

          • i just noticed the space clown boy, thanks, can you hear the wind rush through your head?

          • Bung0

            Oh come now. Try harder.

  • Jct: And who’s going to clean it up? Only the Argentine Solution of paying nuclear workers to bury the waste with bonds they can use for Taxes, Power, Medical and Licenses can save us now.

  • gozounlimited

    You cannot solve a problem from the same consciousness that created it ….. you must learn to see the world anew… Albert Einstein …..

    • gozounlimited

      Still standing at the CROSSROADS…..

    • wunsacon

      >> You cannot solve a problem from the same consciousness that created it

      Extrapolating that a bit: Humans cannot solve their problems. (Maybe our self-learning digital progeny will?)

  • tsisageya

    We humans are very good at tearing down trees, building up man-made monstrosities, abandoning them, and leaving them as trash. We can’t even clean-up after ourselves. That’s a sure sign of immaturity, at the very least. At worst, it’s a sure sign of evil.

  • tsisageya

    But, yes. Let’s colonize other planets to get away from it all. That’s funny, since rocketry can’t even work in the vacuum of space. Don’t get me started.

    In other words, this is all we’ve got.

  • Silverado

    You better hope they’re not abandoned in the US because in order to meet current and future electrical demand nuclear is going to be part of the mix – whether you like it or not. Without nuclear power your bill would be about twice what it is now. It’s clean, renewable and it’s here right now. Of course, I would agree with new building designs & standards should any new facilities be built. Japan and Germany have already reached the same conclusion from what I read. This piece?? This is nothing more than a pipe-dream hit piece on (some) of the….mistakes of the past in other parts of the world using technology that was probably old, worn out and/or improperly designed and operated. Personally I’m not afraid of nuclear power as much as I am afraid of what our current world would look like without it…

    • Tonto

      You do realize, Fukushima may be the “On the Beach” event? Or it may be a component of such an ongoing extinction event. We just have no way to know. I think you ought to rethink your priorities regardless, because in honest morality, it is not the living conditions of those alive today, not half so much as morality is about preserving the only world we have for future generations.

      Look at it this way. We’re at the party called “life”. Don’t fuck it up, because there are other people coming to the party in the future, people who, if they could vote on it, they would out-vote your vote to take care of current needs -at the expense of the future- every time.

      So, your view about not being able to power up you electric razor and your toaster in the morning being a bad thing, is kinda selfish, isn’t it? So, just calm down. We can get along just fine without releasing more deadly radioactive elements into the environment.

  • davidgmills1

    I keep telling you the answer is Liquid fluoride thorium reactors. But you guys will not pay attention. They are the only thing that gives me hope for the future.

    Educate yourself:

    • Tonto

      This man not only looks like a goof-ball with hi godly halo. He is indeed a goof-ball, a very dangerous goof-ball that thinks he is licensed by science to play God with the future.

      • davidgmills1

        Ad hominem much? Obviously you are the classic Luddite. Probably like most Americans have zip knowledge of Chemistry, physics, biology etc.

        I do wish science would not have to come up with big solutions but I don’t think that is nearly as much the fault of science as it is economics. We can’t seem to make small windmills for our homes. We have to make giant monstrosities, for one example.

        The nice thing about thorium reactors is that they can be very small. Maybe not small enough for a single home but certainly small enough for small communities.

        • Tonto

          “The nice thing about thorium reactors is that they can be very small.”

          And they would be spread very widely too. How about the problem of having a deadly radiation source in every community? I suppose in your contorted mind when the hoodlums steal this thorium and put it in the water supply, it won’t have been the fault of the fame-seeking scientists who sold the idea?

          Blow it out your ass, Mr. Ad Hominem.

          Beam this waste of space up, Scotty. He obviously will never accept responsibility for anything stupid he might do, or advocate.

          • davidgmills1

            Shows what a simple mind you have. Thorium in the water supply would do nothing to it. But then again, you have proven often on this thread you are not that bright.

          • Tonto

            So, you are saying you want to put the thorium in the water supply when you’re done playing with it?

            Would you recommend mixing it with anything before putting it in the water supply?

            Cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo!

          • davidgmills1

            You are showing your ignorance again. Thorium is present in many of the soils of the world. It has a half life of 12 -14 billion years. That means it takes the lifetime of the universe to 1/2 decay. Which means its radioactivity is nil. It is not harmful at all. Something that has a half live of a second is extremely radioactive and deadly. Those are the elements and isotopes you have to worry about.

            So putting thorium in the water supply is harmless from a radioactive point of view.

          • Tonto

            You’re mincing your farts, Klingon bum-boy. Thorium in a reactor is highly radioactive, and you know it. No one wants to live next to a thorium reactor. Next you’ll be telling everyone that you had a peanut butter and thorium sandwich for lunch. Then you’ll be telling everyone, no one ever died from thorium radiation poisoning. It’s perfectly safe, right? You can ingest thorium straight out of the reactor and feed it to your children to protect their teeth and bones, right Mr. Fruitcake scientist?


    • terry1956

      Not the way, but one of the ways, one size does not fit all except in a communist shoe factory.

  • Rod Adams


    If by “decentralization” you mean going back to a world that depends on unreliable, weather dependent, diffuse power sources like burning wood, falling water, moving air, or daytime sunshine, I think you are wrong.

    If your vision of decentralization includes smaller nuclear power sources similar to the machines that allow submarines and aircraft carriers to operate off of the grid for months at a time with fuel sources that last as long as the ships, then I might agree that you have a hope of being correct.

    There is little doubt that big nukes are not doing so well these days. It would be laughable denialism to try to claim that they were – even when you include the fact that there are some large nuclear plants that are progressing rather well in China along with a few other slowly moving projects in Finland, France, the US, South Korea, Russia and Japan.

    However, the fundamental technical truth is that both uranium and thorium fission releases 2 million times as much energy per unit mass as burning oil, the most energy dense competitor on the market. Fission also does not release any climate changing gases or other noxious pollutants; its waste is compact and can be safely stored for as long as required.

    Rod Adams

    Publisher, Atomic Insights

    Disclosure: I work for a company that is designing and planning to build small, modular reactors.

    • Tonto

      As long as your work threatens (however remotely) the future of humanity, it is an immoral gamble. Just because you have access to scientific knowledge, tools and capital, you are not licensed to play God. Were I on a jury, I would vote to find you guilty.

      What is not important about the energy equation you cite is the amount of energy that can be produced. It is, morally, all about safety, not the safety approximations science can deliver, but about ultimate safety. It is about effectively dealing with the persistent reality of the infinite complexity of reality. Science is ill-equipped.

      What is important in the current debate, is not the amount of energy produced, it is about the amount of energy that is consumed, and for what innumerable number of pointless purposes.

      Look around at what science has created. That is why I would vote on my jury to find you and all other scientists guilty of a knowledge fraud that has resulted in the deaths of many millions, and the degradation of the lives of many millions more.

      • davidgmills1

        Good thing you won’t be on the jury. This lawyer would kick you off based on stupidity alone. The very things you worry about wiping us out are the very things we need to understand and use to keep us going.

      • davidgmills1

        Good thing you won’t be on the jury. This lawyer would kick you off based on stupidity alone. The very things you worry about wiping us out are the very things we need to understand and use to keep us going.

        • Tonto

          “The very things you worry about wiping us out are the very things we need to understand and use to keep us going.”

          You do claim to be a God then. You are going to save the world from scientific calamity with more science, right?

          Your circular reason is intellectually nauseating.

  • terry1956

    high cost TVA/NRC central governece light water reactors, maybe,
    nuclear no way is out.

  • A Green Road

    List Of 180 Abandoned Or Unfinished Nuclear Power Plants Globally – Worldwide Loss of 1 TRILLION Dollars Or More