Okay I got into an argument with someone the other night over the idea that it's our turn to cause an ecological disaster to benefit our time on the planet to make our lives better and easier and let someone else worry about cleaning up the mess later.
My argument was this, we should be allowed to do whatever we want with nuclear power generation and not care about the waste or byproducts of the power generation so that we can transition off fossil fuels.
Thier counter was we can't be reckless assholes with nuclear power generation and that it's not the same as oil extraction or fossil fuel power plants because of the radioactive stuff.
I thought this was an incredibly short sighted view on the impact of fossil fuel extraction and fossil fuel power generation has had and how destructive it has been.
While I do agree there are some really bad issues with nuclear. Do we create a big waste problem for people after us? sure. Is it probably going to kill people in the future? sure. Could it cause ecological disasters? sure.
I dunno I get that power generation is only a part of the issue with climate but feels like we are just being bullied by old boomer hippies to not use all the things we have available to us.
Perhaps I have in my mind already convinced myself that we are bleeding out and that while nuclear power won't save our leg it could be the tourniquet to push us over the hump into cleaner power generation from wind/solar/water etc.
So shouldn't we be allowed to kick the can down the road like the last generations did?
Yes at ITER development rates, commercial fusion will be a thing around 2100.
Regarding France's nuclear reactor cooling issue, I believe China purposefully held off on inland reactors until they developed reactors that don't use water as a coolant. China clearly sees a reason to develop them, but their end-goal electrical mix is still to be dominated with renewables. Just less so than like, Germany.