Nuclear Power

[ThePenciledOne]

[quote name='notardillacid' date='18 December 2009 - 09:02 PM' timestamp='1261184579' post='2022881']
Firstly, the grade of uranium used for powerplants is not even CLOSE to what is used in a warhead. So unless these CEO's have 10,000 centrifuges in their backpocket then you really aren't giving them jack poo.

For how much croutons gets thrown their way, American nuclear powerplants have incredible safety records. I trust them to keep up the integrity of their plant more than I trust a politician not to use nuclear warheads on areas of dense civilian population.

[/quote]

They don't need to make warheads, they just need to pull a Chernobyl. Sure the records are good, but all it takes is once....

Sorry to be pessimistic, I just find nuclear energy just too dangerous for the current mindset of humanity to handle.

Edited December 19, 2009 by ThePenciledOne

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='ThePenciledOne' date='18 December 2009 - 10:03 PM' timestamp='1261188212' post='2022895']
They don't need to make warheads, they just need to pull a Chernobyl. Sure the records are good, but all it takes is once....

Sorry to be pessimistic, I just find nuclear energy just too dangerous for the current mindset of humanity to handle.
[/quote]

The Penciled One,

You need to read "The Ultimate Resource" (and its sequel) by Julian Simon. It's a book about the farcical logic of "overpopulation." It covers nuclear energy, and shows that coal energy has killed and injured more people than even ten Chernobyls.

~Sternhauser

[jeffpugh]

Did I say Barbaric? I also wanted to add primitive, and less on the barbaric side. Oh well.

[jeffpugh]

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='18 December 2009 - 10:05 PM' timestamp='1261191938' post='2022927']
The Penciled One,

You need to read "The Ultimate Resource" (and its sequel) by Julian Simon. It's a book about the farcical logic of "overpopulation." It covers nuclear energy, and shows that coal energy has killed and injured more people than even ten Chernobyls.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]
I just saw an ad in a Toronto newspaper last week that took up a page... it was a woman wearing an oxygen mask and they talked about some sort of fossil fuel plant that is being planned for nearby. The whole read was about how one certain purity particle can mess someone up. It's sorta scary. I'm fuzzy on the details. Fossil fuel can be damaging.

[ThePenciledOne]

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='18 December 2009 - 11:05 PM' timestamp='1261191938' post='2022927']
The Penciled One,

You need to read "The Ultimate Resource" (and its sequel) by Julian Simon. It's a book about the farcical logic of "overpopulation." It covers nuclear energy, and shows that coal energy has killed and injured more people than even ten Chernobyls.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

I will Stern. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that coal energy is better, far from it. I am only saying that nuclear energy is not the alternative right now.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='ThePenciledOne' date='18 December 2009 - 10:55 PM' timestamp='1261198518' post='2022999']
I will Stern. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that coal energy is better, far from it. I am only saying that nuclear energy is not the alternative right now.
[/quote]
I've been saying that about all kinds of alternative energy methods for a while now. I don't think any of them are at the level yet that they could be a viable replacement for fossil fuels...... and at the same time, I think that when it is viable, the switch will happen naturally and economically.

[Winchester]

I power everything with two Mr. Fusion(r)s.

[kamiller42]

[quote name='ThePenciledOne' date='18 December 2009 - 12:57 AM' timestamp='1261115849' post='2022660']
And if the CEOs really did have the power rather than the government, they would be gone sooner than you could say Frannie May Freddie Mac.
[/quote]
Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac are government run companies. I trust the executives of private companies long before I trust the executives of the federal government (politicians). The media has much of the public angry or suspicious of Fortune 500 companies because they are exploiting the people. And how is this different than what the feds do? In addition, federal government needs a bailout. Yet, no one take responsibility because the federal government doesn't have to declare bankruptcy. Just print all the money you need.

In regards to nuclear power, I'm for it. Everyone holds up Chernobyl as example of why not to, but that is truly the exception. There are 435 plants in the world. [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country"]Source[/url] Perceived eco-friendly Europe has more plants than the U.S. And out of all these plants, we have one case of a disaster taking place in a country that was falling apart and not technologically advanced at the time.

[ThePenciledOne]

[quote name='kamiller42' date='19 December 2009 - 12:53 PM' timestamp='1261241614' post='2023124']
Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac are government run companies. I trust the executives of private companies long before I trust the executives of the federal government (politicians). The media has much of the public angry or suspicious of Fortune 500 companies because they are exploiting the people. And how is this different than what the feds do? In addition, federal government needs a bailout. Yet, no one take responsibility because the federal government doesn't have to declare bankruptcy. Just print all the money you need.

In regards to nuclear power, I'm for it. Everyone holds up Chernobyl as example of why not to, but that is truly the exception. There are 435 plants in the world. [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country"]Source[/url] Perceived eco-friendly Europe has more plants than the U.S. And out of all these plants, we have one case of a disaster taking place in a country that was falling apart and not technologically advanced at the time.
[/quote]

Hey, I was just using the names for the wordplay. I don't really care if its CEOs or the Government, there really is no difference to me.


And like I said before, all it takes is one mistake.

[Socrates]

The dangers of nuclear power are overrated.
Technology has improved vastly since Chernobyl, which was another Soviet debacle.

From my readings on the subject, I've concluded that nuclear power is simply the best option for energy in the long run. In the short run, however, it will be expensive to implement.
However, most of France's electricity is nuclear-generated, so it's not like this far-fetched sci-fi.

[add]

[quote name='Socrates' date='19 December 2009 - 04:30 PM' timestamp='1261254653' post='2023162']
The dangers of nuclear power are overrated.
Technology has improved vastly since Chernobyl, which was another Soviet debacle.

From my readings on the subject, I've concluded that nuclear power is simply the best option for energy in the long run. In the short run, however, it will be expensive to implement.
However, most of France's electricity is nuclear-generated, so it's not like this far-fetched sci-fi.
[/quote]

Not really expensive to implement, when you consider what it cost US now. All the raw materials and labor is in abundance in the US. Compared to the importing of oil for currency, said currency is gone forever, whereas labor cost remains (for the most part). The actual nuclear fuel does not need to be imported and unemployment is a record highs. Just the money paid into unemployment to set on your bottom would be better spent, etc. and could go to shovel ready construction jobs.

In the last presidential election McCain wanted to build 50 nuke plants, but the dems poo-poo'ed the idea. Damm good idea for a looser

[Varg]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' date='18 December 2009 - 11:12 PM' timestamp='1261195927' post='2022968']
Fossil fuel can be damaging.
[/quote]
...

[Fidei Defensor]

Only if they can pronounce it correctly.

[kamiller42]

[quote name='apparently' date='19 December 2009 - 04:13 PM' timestamp='1261257217' post='2023173']
Not really expensive to implement, when you consider what it cost US now. All the raw materials and labor is in abundance in the US. Compared to the importing of oil for currency, said currency is gone forever, whereas labor cost remains (for the most part). The actual nuclear fuel does not need to be imported and unemployment is a record highs. Just the money paid into unemployment to set on your bottom would be better spent, etc. and could go to shovel ready construction jobs.

In the last presidential election McCain wanted to build 50 nuke plants, but the dems poo-poo'ed the idea. Damm good idea for a looser
[/quote]
Rather than build nuke plants or new wells, mama Obama put people to work building new cells for the Gitmo guests. What a farce.

Another reason for more nuke plants is the increase in demand for electricity. All these new electric cars we're supposed to be getting going to run on good intentions?

[Slappo]

[quote name='kamiller42' date='20 December 2009 - 09:12 PM' timestamp='1261372359' post='2023916']
Rather than build nuke plants or new wells, mama Obama put people to work building new cells for the Gitmo guests. What a farce.

Another reason for more nuke plants is the increase in demand for electricity. All these new electric cars we're supposed to be getting going to run on good intentions?
[/quote]

Yeahh!!! Good intentions! It would be great for my electric bill if I could run all of my appliances on good intentions!


Can we build a Good Intentions Power Plant?

Maybe the local ordinary can run it and pass out grace power as he sees fit?

[Nihil Obstat]

You know what we should do instead? Put a treadmill attached to a generator in every prison cell, and let the prisoners run whenever they want, and have those generators act as power plants.

[Moosey]

I know one person who could power a small town with her energy.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[color="#000000"]nuclear power is kind of c[color="#000000"]rap[/color] imo.[/color]

[ThePenciledOne]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='19 January 2010 - 07:10 PM' timestamp='1263942628' post='2040355']
[color="#000000"]nuclear power is kind of c[color="#000000"]rap[/color] imo.[/color]
[/quote]

[Happy_Catholic]

In New Zealand, our "N" word is nuclear. Generally polls show about 80 - 90% of people oppose any form of nuclear power. It all stems from the whole ANZUS break down and nuclear ships and what not.

I happen to sit in that 80 - 90% of opposition. Yes, it may seem safer statistically then conventional methods, except for the fact that when something goes wrong it isn't just a puff of smoke and a fire ball, it tends to be all radioactive. And yeah, okay, so its generally cleaner, except for the whole nuclear waste thing.

Plus, NZL is a really small country, if we had ourselves a nuclear plant that decided to blow its stack, we'd be scr3wd, like super, doper, scr3wd. We dont' have the geography to contain it.

But in all honestly, being nuclear free, its really seeped deep into NZL culture. We get really mad about it, and any politican who even speaks in favour of it, or speaks about even having the discussion about it, tends to find themselves in the unemployment line at the end of election.

I do, however, sleep easier at night, knowing that's not some great big radioactive time bomb near by just waiting for some half asleep schmoo to rest his coffee on the wrong button .