RE: Energy Crisis Postponed (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


servantforuse -> RE: Energy Crisis Postponed (10/14/2009 7:42:39 AM)

As I just mentioned in another thread. France gets 75 % of their energy from nuclear power. Why not us ?




Termyn8or -> RE: Energy Crisis Postponed (10/14/2009 7:54:25 AM)

As I mentioned in a few threads; follow the money and you will find the answer to that.

T




servantforuse -> RE: Energy Crisis Postponed (10/14/2009 8:13:42 AM)

I would blame the more radical enviromentalists. They stop off shore drilling. They don't like coal. They don't want nuclear. They don't even want windmills because they kill birds. I'm wondering if there is any type of energy source they would support. I don't see it.




rulemylife -> RE: Energy Crisis Postponed (10/14/2009 8:38:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

As I just mentioned in another thread. France gets 75 % of their energy from nuclear power. Why not us ?


Nuclear waste.

Yucca Mountain.




Ialdabaoth -> RE: Energy Crisis Postponed (10/14/2009 12:00:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

As I just mentioned in another thread. France gets 75 % of their energy from nuclear power. Why not us ?


Nuclear waste.

Yucca Mountain.



Which is a red herring. Any nuclear waste energetic enough to be dangerous is energetic enough t be useful as an energy source. There's no need to waste *any* of it.




DomKen -> RE: Energy Crisis Postponed (10/14/2009 2:49:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

As I just mentioned in another thread. France gets 75 % of their energy from nuclear power. Why not us ?


Nuclear waste.

Yucca Mountain.



Which is a red herring. Any nuclear waste energetic enough to be dangerous is energetic enough t be useful as an energy source. There's no need to waste *any* of it.

This is thoroughly wrong.

Nuclear waste doesn't just consist of spent fuel rods, which can be reprocessed, but includes such things as contaminated mechanical components. Those contain less useful isotopes which tend to have long half lives and are therefore completely useless as fuel but are dangerous if allowed to contact groundwater. And even after reprocessing of spent fuel there remains a large quantity of the spent rod which is useless as fuel, this includes isotopes like PA-231 which is highly radioactive (half life of 32k years), highly toxic and almost completely useless. It is occasionally used in minute quantities in research but that is it.




Ialdabaoth -> RE: Energy Crisis Postponed (10/14/2009 2:57:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Nuclear waste doesn't just consist of spent fuel rods, which can be reprocessed, but includes such things as contaminated mechanical components. Those contain less useful isotopes which tend to have long half lives and are therefore completely useless as fuel but are dangerous if allowed to contact groundwater. And even after reprocessing of spent fuel there remains a large quantity of the spent rod which is useless as fuel, this includes isotopes like PA-231 which is highly radioactive (half life of 32k years), highly toxic and almost completely useless. It is occasionally used in minute quantities in research but that is it.


I'll completely buy that some of the waste (especially contaminated components) are simply too expensive to extract usefully, but there's still plenty that we can do with the highly radioactive isotopes - if it's hot, then we can stick a thermocouple to it. Give us a few more decades of nano-scale research, and we can find all kinds of uses for this stuff.




Termyn8or -> RE: Energy Crisis Postponed (10/14/2009 8:37:28 PM)

FR

The first thing to do to get nuclear to work really well is to perfect fusion and abandon fission.

Actually even better would be direct conversion to either electricity or some more useful form of power we might discover if we manage to survive long enough. For now everything makes heat. They spout off about greenhouse gases, but what produced those gases ? Something involving heat. I am beginning to wonder if maybe the heat itself is exaserbating the problem. (that is if it exists, is that debate over yet or not ?)

The problem is nobody agrees, and that's why this is not supposed to be a democracy. As much as you might hate to admit it, the founding Fathers of this country agreed with those dreaded Protocols in that democracy does not work. Simple to see for those who look, too many Chiefs and too few Indians. (figure of speech, don't jump down my throat)

Even if it is settled that all that we have right now is fission, these self proclaimed Gods will not likely go to France with the idea of learning anything useful. Remember Chernobyl was built a very very long time ago, things have changed since then.

As far as nuclear waste goes, it's mass pales in comparison to human waste and spent technology. While the substance is alot more dangerous, there is simply alot less of it to deal with. Now if every damnthing we have was not made out of plastic, and did not contain lead, doped phosporous and all kinds of nasty stuff, perhaps the logic would work out differently. For now I have no problem with nuclear, but I wouldn't have a garden if I lived next door. In all though the impact would fall on fewer people.

Even though this is not a democracy, the needs of the many still outweigh the needs of the few. And those needs will increase, especially if we start getting some industry back here. You would think we would hardly need any power since we manufacture very little, but this is not the case.

I think most people would rather have some lead drums a thousand miles away to worry about, rather than a black sky at noon.

T




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.015625