Nuclear Is Now 'Clean Energy' In Colorado (cpr.org)
- Reference: 0176898339
- News link: https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/25/04/02/027233/nuclear-is-now-clean-energy-in-colorado
- Source link: https://www.cpr.org/2025/04/01/polis-declares-nuclear-is-clean-energy/
> In an emailed statement, Ally Sullivan, a spokesperson for the governor's office, said the law doesn't advance any specific nuclear energy project, and no utility has proposed building a nuclear power plant in Colorado. It does, however, allow nuclear energy to potentially serve as one piece of the state's plan to tackle climate change. "If nuclear energy becomes sufficiently cost-competitive, it could potentially become part of Colorado's clean energy future. However, it must be conducted safely, without harming communities, depleting other natural resources or replacing other clean energy sources," Sullivan said.
>
> By redefining nuclear energy as "clean," the law would let future fission-based power plants obtain local grants previously reserved for other carbon-free energy sources, and it would allow those projects to contribute to Colorado's renewable energy goals. It also aligns state law with a push to reshape public opinion of nuclear energy. Nuclear energy proponents promise new reactor designs are smaller and safer than hulking power plants built in the 20th century. By embracing those systems, bill supporters claimed Colorado could meet rising energy demand without abandoning its ambitious climate goals.
[1] https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb25-1040
[2] https://www.cpr.org/2025/04/01/polis-declares-nuclear-is-clean-energy/
About time (Score:2)
This is an obvious win. Why did it take so long?
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely. Fast tracking modern nuclear plant designs is a win for everyone on both sides of the aisle. Clean reliable 24/7 energy.
Gen III plant designs are exceptionally reliable and safe, and the waste they produce is trivial compared to fossil fuels, and even solar / wind.
I would absolutely feel great about my tax dollars going into this kind of effort to electrify our energy infrastructure.
No shit it's clean. It's been clean since 1958 (Score:1)
[1]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik... [wikipedia.org]
For a political movement that instinctively hates the oil and gas industry, the greentards sure do love parroting their fud about nuclear energy.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shippingport_Atomic_Power_Station
Re: (Score:2)
Very few environmentalists oppose nuclear energy these days. Even Greenpeace is in favor of it.
Waste is still a huge, unsolved issue, though. And nuclear power stations are very expensive to build. Other types of nuclear reactors (thorium etc) are promising with less nuclear waste, but still a ways off.
And of course there is environmental destruction during uranium mining operations (and lots of human health concerns), but compared to coal mining of the last 200 years, it's quite acceptable in my opinion.
Re: (Score:2)
Nuclear is simply too expensive. But hey if you want some corporate welfare to keep them afloat you better run that line item by president Elon.
Re: (Score:2)
Take a look at Barakah nuclear power plant in the UAE. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Four years late and only $2 billion over budget (total was $32 billion) they have a working plant. Do you think any environmentalists impeded progress in that country?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barakah_nuclear_power_plant
Re: (Score:2)
> Take a look at Barakah nuclear power plant in the UAE. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
> Four years late and only $2 billion over budget (total was $32 billion) they have a working plant. Do you think any environmentalists impeded progress in that country?
Check how fast China is cranking them out.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barakah_nuclear_power_plant
While the Climate Warms (Score:3)
So resources for immediate reductions in climate emissions will get hijacked for another round of new experimental nuclear reactors. Likely with all the hidden (and not so hidden) public subsidies, cost overruns, delays and lack of reliability that has come to be associated with commercial nuclear power. But it will put money in investors pockets. Gates and the other tech bros can't wait for their investment in the nuclear PR campaign to produce fruit in the form of profitable investment opportunities.
Re: (Score:1)
Gates has dumped a bunch of his own money into nuclear already. Has been for years. [1]https://www.terrapower.com/fun... [terrapower.com]
[1] https://www.terrapower.com/fundraise/
Problem isn't that it's clean or dirty (Score:2)
The problem is that even with the best reactors it is not safe to run them in an unsafe manner.
Basically reactors require maintenance and maintenance costs money and money for maintenance bites into quarterly profits.
It's not a question of if it's a question of when the CEO starts cutting corners so he can get his bonus. And because he doesn't live anywhere near where the disaster is going to hit he doesn't care.
And over and over and over again we have shown that we do not punish people up the f
Re: (Score:2)
> The problem is that even with the best reactors it is not safe to run them in an unsafe manner.
The worst case accident for the current generation of reactors: Three Mile Island. In other words, no lives list, very minor radiation leakage.
No operator wants to _lose_ a reactor and all of the future profits.
guess what -- (Score:1)
"...amounts of climate-warming emissions"
-- it releases heat.
Get a clue (Score:2)
All sources of energy emit heat which includes the Earth itself. The part that matters is nuclear power does not release CO2 which is a GHG that prevents heat from radiating into space by reflecting it back to Earth.
It is low CO2 (Score:2)
From the point of view of climate change, Nuclear produces low CO2 relative to the amount of energy generated so it makes sense to call it "clean energy". There are issues of waste, proliferation, and cost, but countries like France have shown that nuclear can be operated successfully.
Re: (Score:2)
The waste isn't even that bad, simply because unlike the waste products from coal, oil, and gas, it's actually illegal to let the nuclear waste into the environment.