Comments by "Bob thebomb" (@bobthebomb1596) on "There is 'every reason' to have nuclear energy as an option" video.

 @froggy0162 There are alternative reactor designs available that are not water cooled.
2
@froggy0162 Again there are alternative designs that do not use water. With respect to steam turbines however, loss of water would mean loss of power, not loss of the reactor.
2
@froggy0162 Do try thinking, or better yet try reading. The vast majority of the water in turbine system is recycled, only a small proportion escapes. You may also have noticed that coal fired power stations (so common in Australia) also emit steam from their cooling towers? Traditional nuclear plants do require a lot of water to keep the reactors cool, but they are not the only design available or under development. Gas, molten salt and liquid metal cooled designs can vastly reduce the quantity of water required or even eliminate it altogether. As for turbines there are options such as supercritical CO2 that both do away with water and are more efficient than traditional designs
2
Non so blind.
1