Why nuclear plants are shutting down

Thanks for watching! If you’re interested in nuclear power, there’s a lot more we weren’t able to include in this video (but might in future videos). One area is possible nuclear innovations, including both ways to make nuclear safer and less expensive to build. Another is nuclear waste, which hasn’t been the driving reason for these shutdowns but is a big topic of discussion in this space. “Nuclear waste” usually refers to fuel that’s been used in a reactor. Disposing of that waste is one reason Indian Point will take at least 12 years to fully decommission. But, at the same time, finding ways to reuse that fuel is another area of potential innovation. - Cleo

These people who want to shut down always say that the nuclear power will get replaced by renewables, but what they fail to understand is that what they should be replacing is the fossil fuels, not the nuclear.

When all the coal plants have shut down, then we can start to discuss shutting down nuclear. If you are an environmentalist and want to shut down nuclear before coal, then you are not an environmentalist...

The fish being killed in the water pumps are comparable to birds being killed annually by wind turbines. Both are negligible enough to continue striving for clean energy however. Just an interesting point I leaned from studying environmental biology.

I'm from Kenya, blackouts are almost natural. Watching advanced countries that at least have options just shutting a source of power because of fear of a possibility just shows how different our lives are.

As with every other large-scale problem in the world, the majority of people want the problem solved but have no solution or do not want to pay for the solution.

"You can't have a nuclear meltdown on a solar farm" yeah, but we aren't replacing them with solar panels.

I always hate people being like, we can't afford putting nuclear waste into abandoned mines, but not considering burning fossil fuels puts the garabage into the air they breathe

You're literally exposed to far more radiation from the isotopes in coal ash particulates than you are from living next door to an NPP (which is zero above background levels).

While Vox did a great job being even-handed in their coverage, I find it odd that they didn't note the fact that just weeks after Indian Point closed, NYC began to experience a series of rolling power blackouts. In summary, they lobbied to shut down the largest source of low-carbon energy in the name of climate change, replaced it with fracked gas, hiked energy bills across the board, and made your regional power supply more reliant on intermittent and fossil-based generation. Make it make sense.

Nuclear energy is by far one of the cleanest and most reliable sources of energy available to us and protesting against it seems contradictory to the net zero goal. It seems like people protested for the sake of protest and not for a viable reason. Nuclear energy has more merits than demerits like it can provide energy at any time we want. If there's a surge in demand it can fulfill the demand and it doesn't need to be stored. I mean I can go on talking about its advantages for hours.

Humanity’s rejection of Nuclear power was a massive mistake, and the environment has payed dearly for it as we continue to rely on fossil fuels for our electricity

"al-qaeda actually considered targeting a nuclear power plant." Well they actually did target commercial planes. why haven't we shut down air travel yet?

My problem with the “nuclear plants are killing fish in the river” is that Fossil Fuel plants also have that problem. Where do people think the steam in the turbines comes from?

I do understand Mark Ruffalo's issue with gamma radiation

Just like planes, they're the most safe travel transport, yet people loose their minds when one of them suffers an accident.

those two environmentalists they interviewed make me so angry. The notion that we have to chase a perfect source of power, that it's "no pollution or nothing" is absolutely holding us all back. Nuclear is better than fossil fuels. That's a fact. Change in steps is much more attentable than a giant leap into perfection

Sweden only achieved relatively environmentally friendly because big portions of their energy is nuclear, 40-60%. If fact, the way western world found out about Chernobyl was, one of Sweden’s power plant found radiation outside of facility and looked for leaks.

I worked at another nuclear plant that closed. The town has been dying ever since the closure. I was in the industry in 2011 when Fukushima Daiichi happened. The folks that marched on our plant expressed fears that had nothing to do with our energy generation. Thank you for posting this video - it's so refreshing to see the correct information expressed in such a calm and concise manner.

"Lets destroy the planet with oil and coal beacuse glowy rock scary"