I recommend Alex Berezow’s acerbic but informative article at the American Council on Science and Health on the arguments for a nuclear energy future:
Energy models are also highly influenced by ideology and politics. How else can we explain the fact that energy models tend to minimize the implementation of nuclear power, the best energy source that mankind has exploited to date? Designing models that incorporate fantasy rather than reality is how Mark Jacobson concluded that the United States could be powered exclusively by wind, water, and solar by 2055.
He likes Integral Fast Reactors, I like small modular reactors, especially when thorium-based but the message is the same. Support for the rapid deployment of modern technology nuclear power should be much more highly emphasized than at present.
“nuclear power, the best energy source that mankind has exploited to date”
Could we define best? Seems kind of subjective to me. Feel free to be as technical as you want as the family physicist is home this week.
Steve
There’s 4 different vectors one can evaluate on. Energy density; cost (initial capital cost and operating cost); environmental impact; and scalability (what’s the maximum amount of energy that can be generated from it).
I wouldn’t say nuclear is the best; but it is well suited, maybe the only choice for certain uses. A far out one is colonization of the moon, mars or space.
CO- Dave already said we cannot evaluate environmental impact.
Steve