Reply to thread

Here's the little problem, with the fallout cloud of an accident, the "backyard" region is very large.  In fact, the "backyard" potential of any nuclear reactor can be hundreds of miles downwind of the reactor...

So there's that little detail conventiently left out.

Again, why are people preferring the production of steam from radiation to run turbines instead of pre-existing steam from geothermal wells?  There is no logic.  Nuclear plants are MORE EXPENSIVE to build, maintain; their sister industries, mining of uranium, transportation and waste storage of radioactive toxic waste are vastly expensive.  They are TERRORIST TARGEST.  Imagine the destruction if the twin towers were instead nuclear reactors?  Hmmm?

So which is it that you folks prefer in nuclear over geothermal?  Is it the fact that it's more expensive?  More dangerous?  More toxic?  Bigger terrorist worry?  Which of these things that sets nuclear apart from geothermal, both of which use the same steam-driven turbine technology,  is it that you are hopelessly in love with?

Is it that it is trickier to produce steam with radiation, so the prices can be manipulated with less explanations??