Maybe this is already widely understood on here, but I feel understanding how the anti-communist left was leveraged to fight nuclear energy.
As more people are reading this I wanted to share what I consider to be a superior analysis https://communistperspective.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-nuclear-debate-for-and-against.html
And to be clear, you can be pro-renewable without being anti-nuclear I am referring to many of the European Green parties that are anti-nuclear above all else. Nuclear has it’s drawbacks, but it is preferable to climate change, for now.
the idea that nuclear energy could be safe relies on a utopian world in which there is neither conflict nor natural disaster. until now, there is no safe nuclear energy. as much as i’d like hydrogen to drive the world, it won’t for the foreseeable future, because you can’t secure a pipeline in such a world without an empire of evil
It’s pretty much the safest energy source. It kills less people than windmills (this includes construction and transportation of the windmill)
Solar isn’t that clean either. The production uses many toxic materials. Who then get dumped in 3rd world countries.
Some places aren’t suitable for nuclear plants because of tsunamies and earthquakes, but just don’t build near coasts or fault-lines (like that plant in Japan. But Japan is working a new technology to harvest underwater currents)
That second link in my comment actually lays out how the seawall at the Fukushima plant was not built to recommended specifications and that the radiation actually didn’t even kill anyone, the tsunami did.
As to the minerals renewable energy relies on - I found this to be pretty informative. There are a lot of imperialist mining operations that love wind power as well.
the problem is not the plant itself rather than the storages, which have to last. and these cannot be protected from natural disasters and i have not heard of a castor that can actually sustainable and safely hold nuclear waste as of yet.
I don’t mean to be rude but your comment doesn’t read very clearly.
It’s not utopian to think we can have nuclear plants that are not sabotaged or nuclear plants that actually build sea walls to the recommended specs. That is literally just enforcing codes and laws. The fact that the capitalist sphere does not build to specs and engages in gross acts of sabotage should not be considered a mark against nuclear energy, the same thing happens with oil refineries all over the world only the propaganda machine doesn’t latch onto those stories. The seawall at Fukushima was not built to specs and in any case no one has died from the radiation. Rather, as usual, the propaganda machine conflated deaths from the tsunami with deaths from “NUCLEAR MELTDOWN”.
No safe Nuclear energy - say that to the men and women who sail nuclear aircraft carriers and submarines with no adverse effects. Or the power plant in middle of nowhere Ohio that provided half the power to the city from 1959-1966 before being shut down for unspecified reasons never to be reopened. Or the massive Chinese investment into 100 Nuclear power plants. (As an aside, the second link I put in the post addresses the idea that Nuclear power plants are expensive- every West Asian and East Asian power plant tends to be built within budget.)
What you are talking about wrt pipelines and hydrogen either makes no sense or you need to expand upon the thought. Pipelines are not only the products of empires of evil they can be the result of mutually beneficial collaboration. And pipelines are not an insurmountable problem, we literally have pipelines all over the world which can be adapted and even simultaneously used for gas and hydrogen using pipe in pipe technology.
now, i m not saying that nuclear isn’t agreat form of energy compared to coal. compared to gas i m not so sure. personally i would condone hemp oil and plant oils over anything else because they would create a closed loop. whereas any mined ressource causes excess waste. unfortunately we are too many to pull this off atm.
i m talking about the theoretical problem of hydrogen pipelines, as these would have a better throughput than any other form of energy transportation via grids. the problem here is that we don’t even have safe oil pipelines. we have dictatorships and hells around pipelines to keep them secure from sabotage, we run immense security states in order to achieve this. and with the potential of nuclear energy or hydrogen, this only becomes worse, not better.