To equate hazardous waste from the manufacture of solar panels with the extremely toxic radioactive waste generated by nuclear power stations–which will continue to require constant monitoring, redundant safety features and security, long after shutdown–is simply ludicrous (“Nuclear is the way to go,” April 18). Reprocessing opens up a whole new toxic can of worms.
I also find it terribly ironic that people who want to promote nuclear generation as a “climate saving” energy source never seem to like renewable sources and continue to claim that they cannot fill our energy needs, ignoring data and examples from other countries/regions that prove otherwise.
Ellie Ripley needs to take her own advice and do her homework.
Cassandra Greene
Los Osos
This article appears in Apr 25 – May 5, 2019.
Thirty-four percent of 2018 retail electricity sales in California were served by renewable energy such as wind, solar, geothermal, biomass and small hydroelectric power. Without the socialist, government insurance bailouts, no nuclear plants could have operated in the U.S. Private industry won’t touch them. And, least we forget, Washington State’s imploded nuclear program was a financial disaster second only to the Great Depression.
Renewables run into an issue when they reach 50% of the load of the area served, because suddenly you need a ton of energy storage to keep up with baseload. Please go look at Germany, which has run into this problem at scale.
I support nuclear and solar and wind.