Climate activists are usually very against nuclear energy and I don’t think I understand why. Does anyone know?

Arguments I’m somewhat familiar with:

  • sometimes it’s used as a cover for developing nuclear weapons
  • nuclear waste is very bad for living things.

What are the main historical moral arguments?

  • Keld [he/him, any]@hexbear.netEnglish
    5·
    14 hours ago

    I don’t think there exists a single long term storage facility for nuclear waste anywhere in the world. So… that’s not great.

    • InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
      1·
      12 minutes ago

      There’s at least one. In Finland.

      Ninja edit. Haha. I thought they finally finished it. Nope. “Will be” - it’s still under contruction.

      The Onkalo spent nuclear fuel repository is a deep geological repository for the final disposal of spent nuclear fuel.[1][2] It is near the Olkiluoto Nuclear Power Plant in the municipality of Eurajoki, on the west coast of Finland. It will be the world’s first long-term disposal facility for spent nuclear fuel

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_spent_nuclear_fuel_repository

      There was a documentary about it that came out in 2010.

      Danish director Michael Madsen has co-written and directed a feature-length documentary Into Eternity (2010) where the initial phase of the excavation is featured and experts interviewed. The director’s special emphasis is on the semiotic difficulties in meaningfully marking the depository as dangerous for people in the distant future.

    • kristina [she/her]@hexbear.netEnglish
      15·
      14 hours ago

      its all nonsense propaganda, that can all be rebred to produce more energy (and those fissile materials will decay rapidly), there is NO nuclear waste, that can all be fuel. they only want nuclear for weapons and only developed the infrastructure for weapons, so thats why they store the excess fissile material. the energy produced is just a side benefit to western governments.