1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

[GS] Nuclear Discussion (hived off from Mali Discussion thread)

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Human Crouton, Jan 10, 2019 at 3:14 PM.

  1. Human Crouton

    Human Crouton Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2011
    Messages:
    400
    Almost nobody knows that nuclear power has no CO2 emission. The environmentalists in the 70s really, really, really succeeded in spreading their anti-nuclear propaganda.

    Moderator Action: 42 posts regarding nuclear power and related discussion hived off from Mali Discussion thread -- Browd
     
  2. Zaarin

    Zaarin My Dearest Doctor

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    4,921
    Location:
    Terok Nor
    And that propaganda has sadly remained very effective to the present era. :(
     
  3. Disgustipated

    Disgustipated Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    9,903
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Actually not true. All that heavy equipment and steel used in nuke plants requires quite a bit of manufacturing capacity which emits CO2. Not to mention concrete (which wasn't an issue for Navy nuke plants I worked in since there is no concrete on Navy ships).
     
    qadams and Ferocitus like this.
  4. Ferocitus

    Ferocitus Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2016
    Messages:
    2,096
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Adelaide, South Australia
    They also require quite a lot of some rare earth metals to prevent embrittlement of structures housing the reactors.
    Scarce, pricey and largely non-recoverable.
     
  5. pgm123

    pgm123 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 21, 2017
    Messages:
    860
    Gender:
    Male
    Maybe it's the uranium extraction that contributes to global warming? Though most countries (i.e. not the U.S.) reprocess spent fuel, so it requires less uranium. Also, there's the enrichment process, but that presumably takes less energy that the resulting nuclear power, so doesn't have to contribute to green house gas emissions.
     
  6. Furycrab

    Furycrab Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Messages:
    840
    I'm pretty sure they know it doesn't generate CO2, but they probably have a significant balance discussion going regarding what Nuclear power accidents, and weapons do to the environment.

    I find it a bit weird that units are going to be chugging CO2 personally. It makes a bit of sense, but I'm concerned a little for the balance on higher difficulties. I'd hate for high difficulty games to just degenerate due to a ton of tanks, Air, and Naval units being on the board, just like I don't want the AI to be reluctant to use the good units because they have some environmental agenda.
     
    nzcamel, Sostratus and Tiger Genocide like this.
  7. Disgustipated

    Disgustipated Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    9,903
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Yeah this comes off as weird to me. I can kind of see why they did it. But passenger cars and planes are creating the most CO2 (aside from energy production I believe). The military has to be pretty far down the list in CO2 production. Even the U.S. military I doubt is that high.

    I'm mostly worried about balance here. I guess they are trying to encourage peaceful green types to have a small military which could spice things up late game when a big bad aggressor attacks. But it would make more sense for it to be generated by how many roads you have (they already have a mechanism for railroads).
     
    nzcamel likes this.
  8. pgm123

    pgm123 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 21, 2017
    Messages:
    860
    Gender:
    Male
    Hmm... that is a good question. I saw one source that the US military is the single-largest consumer of petroleum in the world, but that's more than a little misleading (because of its massive size). Militaries were exempt from climate change deals in the past and figures don't seem to be tracked well. So, it's hard to say, but it's definitely a factor. I doubt FXS did deep research into this given how hard it is to find reliable figures.
     
    BackseatTyrant and nzcamel like this.
  9. Pietato

    Pietato Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2014
    Messages:
    850
    Location:
    New Zealand
    The problem with nuclear is the waste (which lasts forever), and the damage if something goes wrong. It has no carbon footprint, though.

    It really depends on how you define 'green'.
     
  10. pgm123

    pgm123 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 21, 2017
    Messages:
    860
    Gender:
    Male
    Uranium has a bit of a green tint.

    Uranium mining is definitely not a green industry. I don't know if that justifies the plants producing CO2 in this game, though.
     
  11. Sostratus

    Sostratus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2017
    Messages:
    514
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    It's not going to raise sea levels an inch, though. Nuclear waste is an issue, although we are getting better at just reprocessing it more and more. Plus, the amount of the real bad stuff generated isn't very much (it's a couple % of the total by volume, but the great majority of radioactivity.) I think we are estimated ~400,000 tons of "nuclear waste" ever produced in civilian power worldwide, which would fit on a handful of cargo ships.

    Unfortunately, the old plants having less than ideal designs means it's nigh impossible to build the enormously safer new plants- a vicious cycle. I just hope the tech tree includes some tech or bonus that cuts down nuclear plant risk.
    Of course, coal itself contains uranium that gets into the air when we burn it, and its a much bigger issue than the nuclear accidents we have had because we burn so much coal.

    I just really want to know the numbers on these power resource deposits. Will i even be able to get the lights on in my empire?
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2019 at 5:44 PM
    Amrunril likes this.
  12. Aussie_Lurker

    Aussie_Lurker Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Messages:
    7,515
    Location:
    Adelaide, South Australia
    No CO2 emissions? What, you think that fissionable uranium just magically appears within reach of a nuclear power station-ready for use? Nope, lots of energy & fuel required to mine, mill & enrich uranium fuel...not to mention that the mine sites are usually large distances from the enrichment sites & power plant sites. Then there is waste processing & transportation too. All CO2 intensive activities. Not that I need CO2 emissions to tell me that Nuclear Power is a really bad idea. The basic economics of nuclear power have done far, far more harm to that industry than any environmental protests from 40 years ago. When it takes a country more than a decade to build just a single reactor, you know it's a bad investment.
     
    pgm123, RealDoctorDisco and steveg700 like this.
  13. Aussie_Lurker

    Aussie_Lurker Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Messages:
    7,515
    Location:
    Adelaide, South Australia
    You think nuclear is green? ;)
     
  14. Boris Gudenuf

    Boris Gudenuf Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,361
    Location:
    north of Steilacoom, WA
    Well, the forests around Chernobyl have come back as an environmental paradise, full of game, birds, plants, the occasional strange green glowing lights...
     
  15. Sostratus

    Sostratus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2017
    Messages:
    514
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Minnesota, USA
    Well, maybe so, although everything in the game has that argument attached to it. Mine improvements don't produce any co2, so I imagine the devs are taking that avenue off the table. Of course, if we were being realistic, cow pastures would be massive sources of warming! Moo! :lol:
     
    nzcamel and BackseatTyrant like this.
  16. darkace77450

    darkace77450 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    842
    They might if I hadn't turned them into hamburgers in the Classical Era.
     
  17. bite

    bite Unoffical Civilization Geographer Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,397
    There is actually quite a bit of debate about this with conflicting biological studies
     
    TahamiTsunami likes this.
  18. Aussie_Lurker

    Aussie_Lurker Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Messages:
    7,515
    Location:
    Adelaide, South Australia
    See, this is why I wanted pollution in the later game to be more than just CO2/land clearing effects. I really feel like "over-industrialization" (Mines/Factories/Power Stations) should start having a negative effect on Amenities & Housing, & possibly should even increase the chance of surrounding tiles becoming degraded/pillaged, due to pollution effects.
     
  19. BackseatTyrant

    BackseatTyrant Queer Anarchotranshumanist

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2013
    Messages:
    169
    The thing is, humans destroying nature on a grand scale is not a recent thing. For example, most of Europe's forests were cleared before the industrial revolution
     
  20. Boris Gudenuf

    Boris Gudenuf Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    1,361
    Location:
    north of Steilacoom, WA
    Well aware, but having been a nuclear missile fire direction chief and S-2 (security) NCO for nuclear missile units, I know very well just how misunderstood nuclear everything is to the general public. Alamagordo in New Mexico, site of the first nuclear (test) blast in 1945, is a tourist destination now: while radiation can be dangerous, it is by no means the Overwhelming Doom it is depicted as being, and is already a part of the environmental 'background' in many parts of the world. Famously, people living in Denver, Colorado right next to a large mass of granite at 4000+ foot elevation are exposed to more background radiation than people living next to Three Mile Island (which a friend of mine did - from his house up on the hill you could practically look down into the cooling towers)

    On the other hand, Industrial Pollution and Resource Depletion has had major effects historically: England was starting to burn coal in homes in 952 CE, because they had already started cutting down too much of the forests handy to the towns to use wood. Deforestation was already well advanced long before the Industrial Revolution!
     

Share This Page