Nuclear Power - your thoughts? (survey)

Discussion in 'Alternative Technologies' started by Gypsy_girl, Jun 5, 2006.

  1. midgardsun

    midgardsun Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,999
    Likes Received:
    4
    Dont worry I have a very nice life in nature far away from all these things, its just one of my hobbies to learn about bad things going on. I have spent much time in nature with happy people, its time to look also at the rest of society, cant ignore that. I ignored what was going on in the world for many years but then I have to catch up with information. When I am updated I will stop consuming news taking some years to digest the input :)
     
  2. snowtiggernd

    snowtiggernd Member

    Messages:
    1,171
    Likes Received:
    587
  3. machinist

    machinist Banned Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    372
    [​IMG]


    solar cells make use of 29% of the energy in the sunlight falling on them? that's 71% room for improvement!!

    europe pays japan to take their nuclear waste off their hands. japan reprocesses it, and uses it in their own plants. europe used to throw it in the ocean, and yes the containers ARE leaking. in america for the past 30 years high level waste has sat in the plant that created it. there is one exception, three mile island. the melted core could not be left as-is and was disposed of very quietly.
     
  4. TheMadcapSyd

    TheMadcapSyd Titanic's captain, yo!

    Messages:
    11,393
    Likes Received:
    18
    Because wind power doesn't produce enough electricity.

    As for sun, it takes a massive amount of energy and hazardous materials to make a solar panel. They're really not so great.
     
  5. machinist

    machinist Banned Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    5,149
    Likes Received:
    372
    i like this idea. coupled with newer technology that wasn't even available when you made this post the possibilities are endless. continuing to develop technology in all methods and new methods of power generation is where we need to continue.

    take for instance this little gem
     
  6. odon

    odon Slightly Popular

    Messages:
    17,597
    Likes Received:
    9
    I think that is your problem. You are looking and then twisting anything and everything in a negative way. Even walking away from topics that turn out to be not true or different than you first thought. I might be being unfair, but not much, imho.
     
  7. odon

    odon Slightly Popular

    Messages:
    17,597
    Likes Received:
    9
    Can you please make some sense?
     
  8. junglejack

    junglejack aiko aiko

    Messages:
    1,703
    Likes Received:
    31
    The future is in solar, and wind energy-- that is where the research should be, Granted these methods needed to be perfected to produce better and more efficiently-
    But the nuclear idea has been around for awhile, no one seems to want to commit to it- -I think it has too many issues-cost, & waste are just 2 of them. Then you would have to get any movement for this, past the environmentalists and thru congress- no-one wants to touch it-
    Lets move on- 2-of the most powerful natural forces in the universe are the sun and the wind--We already got windmills (like Holland) going on in the desert in Nevada- -and solar panels are being perfected everyday- - Its safer & cleaner, and in time , after enuff research , I think people a lot brighter than me will figure how how to harness this energy for everyday life-
    Just some thoughts
    jack
     
  9. midgardsun

    midgardsun Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,999
    Likes Received:
    4
    I think one important thing is not to try to replace all the fossile energy used now by alternative energy. We have to use much less energy than at present, change our life style from being "passive consumers" to "active producers", learn to use our hands again to produce things which is a gift. Then we can learn for example to play instruments again, meet to make music which for example is better than just passively consuming music by burning energy.
    The little energy we need then can easily be produced with non- fossile methods.
    Anyway, our style of life is not durable- passive consuming energy makes us mentally sick, fat and disabels us to take part in real productive, creative life.
     
  10. sunfighter

    sunfighter Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    3,814
    Likes Received:
    286
    You have such profound trust in the U. S. Government and human nature. I do not.
     
  11. sunfighter

    sunfighter Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    3,814
    Likes Received:
    286
    It sounds like you haven't done your research. Please read this entire thread and see if it changes your mind.

    If you think that nuclear waste isn't dangerous, you don't have the facts.
     
  12. midgardsun

    midgardsun Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,999
    Likes Received:
    4
  13. odon

    odon Slightly Popular

    Messages:
    17,597
    Likes Received:
    9
    I didn't know the US government owns and runs all the Nuclear power stations in the US.
     
  14. odon

    odon Slightly Popular

    Messages:
    17,597
    Likes Received:
    9


    11 March 1958
    A B-47 on its way from Hunter Air Force Base in Georgia to an overseas base accidentally dropped an unarmed nuclear weapon into the garden of Walter Gregg and his family in Mars Bluff, South Carolina. The conventional explosives detonated, destroying Gregg's house and injuring six family members. The blast resulted in the formation of a crater 50-70 feet wide and 25-30 feet deep. Five other houses and a church were also damaged; five months later the Air Force paid the Greggs $54,000 in compensation.

    Don't you think that is quite funny?
     
  15. sunfighter

    sunfighter Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    3,814
    Likes Received:
    286
    The U. S. Government is responsible for the safe storage of nuclear waste for the next 10,000 years.
     
  16. odon

    odon Slightly Popular

    Messages:
    17,597
    Likes Received:
    9
    Agh, I see where you're coming from now.



    The EPA has stated that its proposed public health standards for the high-level radioactive waste disposal facility at Yucca Mountain, Nevada will protect public health for 1 million years. Under the standards, claims EPA, people living close to the facility would not receive total radiation higher than natural levels people experience routinely in other areas of the country.

    "It is an unprecedented scientific challenge to develop proposed standards today that will protect the next 25,000 generations of Americans," said EPA Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation Jeffrey Holmstead in a press release. "EPA met this challenge by using the best available scientific approaches and has issued a standard that will protect public health for a million years."

    The proposed standards set a maximum dose level for the first 10,000 years, more than twice as long as recorded human history. To provide safety beyond 10,000 years to 1 million years, EPA is proposing a separate, higher dose limit based on natural background radiation levels that people currently live with in the United States. The proposed standards also require that the facility must withstand the effects of earthquakes, volcanoes and significantly increased rainfall while safely containing the waste during the 1 million-year period.

    Congress authorized different federal agencies to perform different functions related to Yucca Mountain. EPA sets standards to protect human health and safety. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is responsible for implementing EPA's standards and determining if the Yucca Mountain facility can be safe enough to contain nuclear waste. The Department of Energy (DOE) owns, constructs, applies for licenses, and will operate the facility, should it be approved. The Yucca Mountain facility will be allowed to open only if it meets EPA's standards to protect human health and the environment. To learn more about the Yucca Mountain standards, visit http//www.epa.gov/radiation/yucca
     
  17. midgardsun

    midgardsun Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,999
    Likes Received:
    4
    Usually the big civilizations dont last that long. More like some hundred years in average, nowdays and in future big changes will happen even faster.
     
  18. braininavat2

    braininavat2 Member

    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    0
    Don't move to France...

    It is not even worth having a discussion..People are far too biased, propagandized and completely clueless to even bother with on this subject.

    Environmental restrictions make it impossible for the US to do anything more with nuclear power.

    China is so far ahead of the US on buying up uranium properties that it is practically game over..

    The US is not going to do shit with nuclear power, so who cares how "unsafe" you think it is.
     
  19. sunfighter

    sunfighter Hip Forums Supporter HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    3,814
    Likes Received:
    286
    Your info is old. There is no solution and I don't trust the U. S. Government to come up with one that is scientifically sound.

     
  20. odon

    odon Slightly Popular

    Messages:
    17,597
    Likes Received:
    9
    Thanks. I've now read the funding is drying up...but it isn't all over yet.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice