Wind and Solar Produce More than Nuclear for First Time in US #shorts

Wind and solar produce more than nuclear for first time in US

---
---
Leave a Voicemail Line: (219)-2DAVIDP
---
David tech:

-Timely news is important! We upload new clips every day! Make sure to subscribe!

#davidpakmanshow #wind #solar

[FoggyLungz]

Windmills give you cancer! Tust me, no one knows windmills like me - Stable Genius 🤡

[tomdonahoe]

If we're serious about nuclear even as a "bridge" technology we need to be developing molten salt 🧂 Thorium cycle reactors. The Thorium fuel cycle doesn't have the very long life radioactive waste problems that conventional Uranium cycle reactors have. Plus Thorium cycle reactors don't breed Plutonium so the waste can't be reprocessed to make nuclear weapons. Unlike Uranium, the common isotope of Thorium is what's used for Thorium reactors so the material is much more available.

[michaelmiller]

About 20 years ago the University of Oregon developed a self cooling reactor that will fit in a cargo container. The reactor developed enough energy to supply a population of 40, 000
People. 2-3 years ago a major licensing requirement was met. This compact nuclear reactor would be easily secured and maintained on a very small footprint.
Something to be considered

[jimdavison]

Here in our province in Canada we have achieved over 80% of our non peak demands from wind alone and that's before our new expansion comes on line. Add several solar projects to the mix and its pretty cool. No power from fossil fuels at all.

[tlstechtalk]

The more ways to produce electricity the better. The beauty of electric vehicles is that they are not locked in to one form of energy as ICE vehicles are.

[SeanPat]

The problem with nuclear power is partially technology, but mostly management. If you have an organization that’s trying to complete a task at the lowest possible cost, sooner or later somebody is going to cut corners.

This happens in a lot of industries, but the consequences of it happening in the nuclear industry is catastrophic.

[davidroberts]

We really don’t care what you’re OK with. You are not going to tell the American people what they can and can’t use.

[LOGICNREALITY]

theres no such thing as wind, where does it come from? the earth is flat hahahahahh

[Alrukitaf]

Are we transitioning fast enough? I would say not.

[ALucas]

There's a Nobel Prize winning scientist who is working out how to make radioactive waste safe by using lasers to knock off parts of the atoms, to make it safe in minutes, instead of the 10s, 100s, or 1000s of years that certain materials naturally take.

[bartonteeters]

Allergies or good weed? Jk it’s the storage issue for solar and wind. We need nuclear. We need to end coal and gas as soon as possible. Nuclear only takes ten years.

[DsTAiiNoh]

Problem with wind and solar is, not everyday the sun will shine. Not everyday the wind is going to blow. Having nuclear to offset that is crucial imagine having rolling blackouts every other day because you’re not creating enough renewable energy…

[josephtpg]

Need to have a way of charging cordless equipment directly from solar

[jenniferdunn]

I would love to switch over to solar/wind energy. Here in MD I can switch. But, it costs 3 times as much as traditional energy. I simply cannot begin to afford it.

[davidsenderodelsanto]

Fukushima - enough said about safety. Splitting atoms is a complicated, expensive, and dirty way to boil water.

[freethinker]

The problem is the Nuclear cost to much. The cost for power generation (all figures in US dollars).
• Tracking PV $26-67 per MWh
• Fixed-axis PV $29-80 per MWh
• Onshore wind $32-83 per MWh
• Onshore wind plus storage $50-124 per MWh
• Fixed-axis PV plus storage $58-178 per MWh
• Nuclear energy costs $112-189 per MWh

[seethrough]

David, please allow me to give you a quick overview of electricity generation methods.
It’s possible to use (not in particular order)
1. Fossil fuel (incl. coal, petroleum, and gas)
2. Nuclear power
3. Hydroelectric
4. Solar
5. Wind
6. Tidal power
7. Fuel cell

Every one has its drawback or limitation or possibility.
We need to honestly evaluate all power generation methods considering all metrics to make a fair and balanced assessment.

[themiddleagedgamer]

I agree that new nuclear would be an option. I am especially interested in thorium reactors since it is supposed to be so much safer, and thorium so abundant. Using uranium, you might as well be burning diamonds. But nuclear plants are stupid expensive and take forever to build. Plus no one knows how to do it anymore.

[melanatedone]

You need to get away from the coal powered charging station

[BlueDirt_ProAggressive]

Nuclear should be the foundation, wind and solar fill in the gaps while fossil fuels are used less and less. Diversity of energy is important but for the avg person meaning ppl that live in and around cities don't need fossil as much as far off rural folks.