As Cornelius says Perception is Everything and the nuclear industry which for example Cornelius ‘works with’ at SKB has been working hard to change perceptions even while technically and scientifically there are 1000s of unresolved problems with abandonment of nuclear wastes in what is essentially a deep mine. The insinuation is now that nuclear is far less of an existential threat than climate change and is indeed “clean energy.” The cognitive dissonance of knowing that there is no “away” for the wastes but justifying the production of ever more (and hotter wastes from more highly enriched uranium) is essential to the survival of nuclear power and the production of ever more wastes. The potentially planetary life-destroying impacts of nuclear wastes will remain throughout many climate changes in the future. Making more is the definition of madness.
I totally agree and would add that the splitting of the Atom was probably the first time ever that a circumstance / situation was arrived at which can never be reversed. One is either for or against. Not to condemn is to condone insanity.
Writing this on the anniversary of the TPNW I have to hold on to the hope that the nuclear bomb can one day be eliminated out of existence. But yep, the genie is out of the bottle now. I try not to think too hard about all the plutonium that's been created over the past decades 😳
Thanks Marianne. I think you're completely right that there's a *lot* of cognitive gymnastics that goes on around the different aspects of the nuclear complex - energy generation, weapons, waste, they all often seem to operate in a very siloed fashion as though the other aspects barely even exist. But of course they absolutely do!
My sense is that those in the business of dealing with the waste stockpiles try to stay away from talking about whether we should be creating more (at least in the UK, not so sure about other countries where it's all still state owned) And definitely, the power side rarely talk about the waste. I certainly didn't see any mention of it anywhere in the big fanfare of Starmer's announcements that we MUST have more nuclear to power this big AI boom he's pushing for...
There's a strong feeling of emperor's new clothes on both sides of that story I think. Not that you'd know that from all the breathless media coverage!
Before one can consider if it is a "asset" , consider if it relates to finance. Context is important, because nuclear has no record of being a financial asset to anyone who isn't corrupt. Quite the opposite .
I *think* Cornelius meant it more in the sense of a cultural or storytelling asset rather than a financial one - a tangible means of articulating aspects of the 20th/21st century experience to far future generations?
As Cornelius says Perception is Everything and the nuclear industry which for example Cornelius ‘works with’ at SKB has been working hard to change perceptions even while technically and scientifically there are 1000s of unresolved problems with abandonment of nuclear wastes in what is essentially a deep mine. The insinuation is now that nuclear is far less of an existential threat than climate change and is indeed “clean energy.” The cognitive dissonance of knowing that there is no “away” for the wastes but justifying the production of ever more (and hotter wastes from more highly enriched uranium) is essential to the survival of nuclear power and the production of ever more wastes. The potentially planetary life-destroying impacts of nuclear wastes will remain throughout many climate changes in the future. Making more is the definition of madness.
I totally agree and would add that the splitting of the Atom was probably the first time ever that a circumstance / situation was arrived at which can never be reversed. One is either for or against. Not to condemn is to condone insanity.
Writing this on the anniversary of the TPNW I have to hold on to the hope that the nuclear bomb can one day be eliminated out of existence. But yep, the genie is out of the bottle now. I try not to think too hard about all the plutonium that's been created over the past decades 😳
Thanks Marianne. I think you're completely right that there's a *lot* of cognitive gymnastics that goes on around the different aspects of the nuclear complex - energy generation, weapons, waste, they all often seem to operate in a very siloed fashion as though the other aspects barely even exist. But of course they absolutely do!
My sense is that those in the business of dealing with the waste stockpiles try to stay away from talking about whether we should be creating more (at least in the UK, not so sure about other countries where it's all still state owned) And definitely, the power side rarely talk about the waste. I certainly didn't see any mention of it anywhere in the big fanfare of Starmer's announcements that we MUST have more nuclear to power this big AI boom he's pushing for...
Yes the uranium fuelled AI boom - or Kaboom if Kier has his way...
There's a strong feeling of emperor's new clothes on both sides of that story I think. Not that you'd know that from all the breathless media coverage!
Before one can consider if it is a "asset" , consider if it relates to finance. Context is important, because nuclear has no record of being a financial asset to anyone who isn't corrupt. Quite the opposite .
I *think* Cornelius meant it more in the sense of a cultural or storytelling asset rather than a financial one - a tangible means of articulating aspects of the 20th/21st century experience to far future generations?