The 30-year itch America’s nuclear industry struggles to get off the floor

[longship]

2. As usual, public opinion lags the science

I am not trying to be provocative here. But I don't see how we can solve the energy/global climate equation without nuclear power.

It was climate change that changed my mind about nuclear power. And the Japanese nuclear disaster hasn't changed my mind, but now with qualifications.

There are some upcoming nuclear technologies which can solve the problems. One in particular is mentioned in the article, modular reactors, which are small, encapsulated modules related to those used in interplanetary space probes. These can operate safely for decades with zero maintenance, as has been aptly demonstrated by the Voyager and Pioneer spacecraft. This is a technology which can help. Unfortunately, it suffers from the one big issue that all nuclear power systems so far exhibit, What the fuck do you do with the waste? To say nothing about there's the issue of refining the waste for weaponry.

That may be solved by liquid thorium reactors which basically can solve both issues.

The bottom line is that it is going to take (as Bob Novella might say) an investment of billions of dollars into alternative power sources. I don't know how you do it without nuclear.

Some will disagree here. But solar, wind, and many other techs are transient (no solar at night). Unless battery tech experiences huge advances, storage is in big trouble. Hydrogen is a possible solution, not as a source (which it isn't -- don't get me started here), but as a storage media. Unfortunately, hydrogen requires a rather large change in infrastructure. Not very practical in the short term.

The solution to the energy problem and global climate is funding for primary science research. One thing is certain. New science will help us solve these problems.