Why nuclear power will (and won't) stop climate change

Chapters:
0:00 Introduction
2:23 Is nuclear power safe?
5:22 Is nuclear the best way to generate low carbon electricity?
16:20 How do energy grids work in practice?
25:05 Spicy secret section
35:45 Bringing everything together

Thanks must also go to REN21, who made it possible for me to interview several energy experts for this video, including their president Arthouros Zervos. Also thank you to @ClimateAdam for his edits on the (considerable!) script.

In this video I discuss the relative role nuclear power will play in our future. If we want to lower our carbon emissions then we need to stop generating power using fossil fuels - that means choosing between nuclear power and renewable technologies like solar power and wind power. But which of these is better? I examine the carbon impact, the cost, and a variety of other metrics. However, we also need to discuss how energy grids work in practice, including the difference between baseload generation and flexible generation. By the end of this video/documentary, we have some firm answers about why nuclear power will and won't stop climate change. In short: it's complicated. But nuclear isn't essential, merely very useful.

---------- II ----------

---------- II ----------

Huge thanks to my supporters on Patreon: Nafi Iftekhar, Andrew Young, Cody VanZandt, Jesper Koed, Eric Webb, David Edwards, Jovana, hennersfl, Federico Ameijenda, Jon Sjöberg, Jack Troup, Austin Frazee, SexyCaveman , KASponland , James Munro, Chrismarie , Oskar Hellström, Sean Richards, Kedar , Julian, Omar Miranda, Alastair Fortune, bitreign33 , Mat Allen, Anne Smith, Colin J. Brown, Princess Andromeda, Leighton Mackenzie, Ethan Fuller, BenDent , Charles Bray, Andy Hartley, Lachlan Woods, Tim Boxall, Dan Hanvey, Simon Donkers, Kodzo , jawad alalasi, James Bridges, Liam , Wendover Productions, Kendra Johnson.

[mivapusa]

"Wind turbines: Stealing power from the stooorm!"

*"Yes. Enslave the wind"*

[bechetfelix]

My personal conclusion. We all hate coal, the worst energy source you can possibly imagine. Let's get rid of that no matter how.

[bcharms]

Worth noting too that some of that list of "all renewable" includes biomass, which is literally burning wood

[benisser]

I think there's a serious problem in framing renewables as "decentralized people's energy", physically the points at which the power is generated might be dispersed and decentralized, but producing the panels and generators still requires huge factories and a globalized supply of materials, and have to be paid through the finance system, with the same old culprits benefiting.
Especially in the developed world where much of the countries are unlikely to get their own production going, with people too poor to straight up buy western tech for themselves it's extremely likely it will instantly get financialized, with people being made to pay a monthly electricity bill for solar panels on their own roof. Big moneybags might resist it because there's less profit to be had than fossil and nuclear at this moment, but the profit is still there.
There's no tech you can pick to escape that dynamic, people have to consciously make political changes if they actually don't want to be ruled by capital.

[Xambonii]

As someone currently working in the nuclear industry, I have never heard anyone say that we should only use nuclear power and not renewables. We pretty much all say it should be a mix somewhere between 20% to 60% nuclear.

[LeahandLevi]

This video was super well balanced so thanks for that nuanced view. I feel like we get so bogged down in "which one is better" when we just need to get everything and anything going NOW.

[pawwilon]

Interesting how decommissioning is always mentioned with nuclear, but rarely in case of the millions of panels and turbines we'll have to replace as wave 1 of EOL now approaches, which are not made with recycling in mind at all...

[hedgehog]

I would point out that storage technology has actually made some pretty big strides recently, it's just not the lithium-ion batteries that everyone is thinking about but rather much simpler technologies like thermal storage.

[ardabaser]

Imagine supporting the green party and forcing your government to remove the nuclear reactors to install fossil-fuel generators.

[NickTrouble]

As an engineer at a nuclear power plant, and knowing many people that have worked at three mile island before the meltdown.
There is so many changes that happen even yearly to every plant to increase the safety of the plant. For example after both TMI and Fukushima, our plant went under massive changes do that the risk is minimized.
Another saying that that is in nuclear, "minimal risk is not no risk". So if something can go wrong, we take percussions and in some cases assume the incident will happen, allowing for minimization of risk to the public and its workers.

Update 9/25/2020:
Going to add another interesting comment to this, back before TMI some nuclear plants had the ability to load follow (mostly B&W plants).
For example, the plant I work at had the ability to go from 927 MWh to 476 MWh in less than 2.4 seconds. With any number between their taking about the same time. The inverse is also true on load up.
In the US, the NRC restricted this practice for 99% of nuclear plants, as they saw this practice as, "Non-Conservitive".

[connorwright]

On your point about capacity, I think it's worth mentioning that solar pannels can be installed on rooftops, effectively taking up zero space (or at least significantly less space). I think solar could be a good way to supplement energy demands alongside nuclear power.

[dylanhaugh-ewald]

It's a small thing, but I gotta say I appreciate the mention about the "esoteric" storage scheme by way of electric vehicle fleet. I'm an environmental engineer and knew most of this stuff already, but I enjoy the video anyway! A lot of creators might leave that mention out, but those little things really make the videos valuable and entertaining for a wider demographic! Looked into the idea and it was a great read, and I'm glad I saw this video now!

[benjaminfisher]

Overview - Renewable where we can, nuclear where we need. A hybrid system is the best.

This video is awesome, it needs more views.

[Aetohatir]

I'm not in favor of any technology, I'm just against fossil fuels.
By extension I am extreme against the German government (my government) shutting down nuclear power plants instead of coal and gas, before we are carbon neutral.

[zme]

Thank you for mentioning the need for behaviour change in relation to how we use energy I feel it's often skipped in these types of discussions, the mindframe of someone/something will swoop in and save us so just keep on doing what your doing is what got us in the mess we're in today

[BotkillaK]

Thank you for this video. I saw it a bit late, but it was a good watch both technically and philosophically. TL;DR - I agree with you that nuclear in and of itself isn't a silver bullet and needs to be combined with renewables in most places to actually generate the energy we need reliably enough to maintain a decent standard of living. You also helped shed light on my own recent change in pro-nuclear enthusiasm.

I used to be extremely enthusiastic about nuclear fission, but have found over the past year or so that enthusiasm has waned a bit. Especially with my time on Twitter, I see so much universal consensus about nuclear fission as a magic solution that has few downsides. Revisiting the technical arguments for/against fission and renewables, the merits that originally sold me on it are still there, which is why I've never been anti-nuclear.

That just led me to questioning what caused the recent waning of enthusiasm and other sorts of independent research. Then I saw the segment on this being a proxy for a clash of worldviews, which in many political spaces I've found to be accurate. The difference between seeing humanity as supreme heroes who will innovate our way out of problems vs humanity being a part of interconnected systems that needs to work within that and change behavior as needed was pretty compelling for me.

That's how I realized what changed. Even though I work in a STEM field, I have become less optimistic especially since 2020 that scientific advancement and technological innovations alone will help guide humanity into the future. To rely on technology like that is to enslave ourselves to technology. Our systems are fucked. Our incentives are fucked. We need to change and restructure those to produce better outcomes. That's how in conjunction with technology we'll actually unfuck ourselves. It will be painful, but in the end we'll be better off.

Hopefully this finds you, and sorry for the essay.

[coreyfro]

No nuclear advocate I know says anything like "we only need nuclear".

Every nuclear advocate I know says, "nuclear will add stability to a carbon free grid."

I think this is an unfair criticism.

Also, all nuclear advocates I know are also pro rooftop solar.

We are also pro electric car, and our power grid isn't ready for that increased demand. Putting roof top solar and electric cars in homes Democratizes power, , but it also increases grid dependencies. We need to add capacity to our grid to meet this challenge. This includes supply from homes. It also includes supply from grid.

This is the lifestyle change we are trying to make.

[AndyBlair]

Start of the video: Oh cool nuclear and renewable
End of the video: SEIZE THE MEANS OF ENERGY PRODUCTION


This was a very good balanced video, IMHO I'd say nuclear or renewables, just give me SOMETHING

[hunterdouglas]

This is possibly your best video to date in my opinion. Nuanced and detailed, really gets into the weeds on explaining why people have the positions they do on the topic. Nice work!

[PotatoMcWhiskey]

I appreciate you using the civ graphic lmao