Macron calls for 14 new reactors in nuclear 'renaissance'

-The French government lobbied hard -- and successfully -- to have nuclear power labelled as "green" by the European Commission.

That doesn't make nuclear power 'green'. It wipes out the credibility the European Commission.

This is one area where I sincerely wish the US would follow the lead of the French. They manage the fuel cycle to maximize re-use of spent fuel and minimize nuclear waste. They have a reliable zero carbon power supply serving the great majority of their electric power needs. They are not letting unfounded fear overcome good judgement.

Why?

Because a monopoly can charge whatever it wants!

GBR48

-The French government lobbied hard -- and successfully -- to have nuclear power labelled as "green" by the European Commission.

That doesn't make nuclear power 'green'. It wipes out the credibility the European Commission.

Well, it has enabled France to have some of the lowest CO2 emissions in Europe.

Less Co2 means more nuclear waste. Choose your poison.

France has comparatively clean record of nuclear reactors, but that does not mean they should build more and more unrelentingly.

Just look at the Fukushima saga..

He and his extended family should be forced to live right next to these.

One accident is all it takes and it can be huge.

France was hardly going to dump an industry into which it had invested so much.

Oh somebody finally woke up to the problem of charging all those electric cars we are being forced to buy?

Anyone thinking electric cars are the future are insane. It's capitalism at its finest.

Less Co2 means more nuclear waste. Choose your poison.

The French use the entire nuclear fuel cycle to its fullest. Spent fuel is reprocessed often multiple times. Their way of operating nuclear power creates very little nuclear waste.

80% of electricity is generated from nuclear but still sky-high power bills, why?

Reprocessing used fuel is extremely expensive. The benefit is the French do not need to buy much new uranium and they create very little nuclear waste compared to how nations using nuclear reactors that do not reprocess their fuel.

If they must have nuclear, but can wait just a bit, fusion plants will be much safer tech. Money better spent.

Large scale generation of electrical power from fusion is probably still two or three generations away. Other articles on this subject mention that the recent 5 second fusion test in UK will be that test site's last test. Why? The pressures and temperatures necessary are so extreme the toroid is no longer structurally sound. It's not safe to use any more. Even if controlled fusion reactions can be sustained the material science to build facilities capable of handing continuous temperatures higher than that of the sun and extreme pressures for decades of commercial use in power production is not there. I strongly suspect that a new nuclear power plant authorized today and not completed for another ten years will be hitting the end of its safe service life before all the problems associated with fusion power are worked out and man is ready to build commercially viable fusion power plants.

stormcrow

Less Co2 means more nuclear waste. Choose your poison.

Overwhelmingly nuclear waste. It's a problem but it won't catastrophically destroy the earth. CO2 will.