As an answer to the problem of global warming, rising energy needs and the rapid depletion of natural resources, does nuclear power get your vote?
I completly agree that nuclear power is the best temp fix to global warming. While it carries it's risks, it could be the only way to stop global warming while other methods are developed such as an effective solar power or wind power. IMO the best method would be to utilise the power of the sea to produce power but which ever method is used in the future, it can only happen if the world's governments are willing to invest money into developing these methods.
He's from Croatia, so he may have good reason to say "No!!". Croatia was hit hard by the Chernobyl disaster in 1986.
And what do we do with the nuclear waste created? Chuck it into the sea affectively killing fish and other marine life because getting rid of nuclear waste any other way costs too much money. If Sellafield is anything to go by, I think we should not rely on Nuclear energy. It is dangerous and not cost affective. We need to look into Solar and Lunar energy. That is the way forwards.
It may be the way foward but it is not yet advanced enough to rely on as a cure to global warming. I admit Nuclear power has it's risks but it is the only ready available source of power that is readily and will stop global warming.
I think that Lunar and solar energy has always been a way forward but we have continued going traditional. There are a few people who have solar energy running their homes. If people don't mind swimming in the sea full of radio active waste and then glowing in the dark, that is their choice. Hydrogen is too flammable so Hydrogen is not advised. Overall I think Nuclear has to be the worst. We are living in a world full of terrorism. Now terrorism is a major threat to the UK. I think blowing up a Nuclear facility would be on top of their list. Not only killing everybody but for many years, the area would be a no go due to levels of radio activity. Nuclear is so powerful that if we wanted to end the war in Iraq, drop a nuclear weapon and that war will be over in twenty minutes. Nuclear is a no. Many Green Peace activists would refuse to allow nuclear as an everyday form of energy.
Fuck green peace activists! At the end of the day, its Nuclear power and the risks that come with it or we all go and live with the fishes when the sea level rises!
If terrorists wanted to blow up a Nuclear plant they would have already. There's one in Bristol, I think.
It's not an answer to the problem but it can and almost certainly will be a part of the solution in the medium term. We need to accept the relatively small risk nuclear energy poses in order to offset the much larger risk of continued unrestricted hydrocarbon use...
True, but if we started having Nuclear Power plants dotted around London... Nuclear energy is always an option but what about exploiting the energy and light we get from the sun? How about more use of the sea by putting windfarms of turbines into the deep currents of our oceans? Yes, it would take a lot of turbines but it can be done and we have a lot of ocean in this world. Also what nobody seems to want to answer is if we used Nuclear energy, how are ya gonna get rid of the waste, environmentally friendly and at a low cost without simply chucking it into the sea without a care of who's shores it washes up on? A link: http://library.thinkquest.org/3471/nuclear_waste_body.html
With current technology renewables can not make up anything approaching half of the energy difference there will be once we start moving away from fossil fuels. It's clearly the future and there needs to be much investment in R&D in renewable energy technology. We need to cut something like 80% of fossil fuel consumption in the next couple of decades if we have any hope of averting climate catastrophe. So that leaves us with a huge deficit in the medium term, and a new wave of nuclear power stations will probably have to go some way to fill in the gap. Nuclear waste isn't just chucked into the sea It can be reprocessed and stored fairly safely. It's a problem - nuclear is very far from ideal - but it's still probably one of the least worst options until we have the ability to rely much more than we currently can on cleaner and safer sources. By then perhaps we'll have nuclear fusion technology anyway...
Loads of scientists worldqwide have agreed to work on Nuclear Fusion processes. I would have denied the use of Nuclear energy vehemently not that long ago, but to cut carbon emissions, which appear to be at critical mass, we need to do something pretty quick.We don't the public willpower to live with a countryside littered with windfarms, good or bad, is a reality. I don't think we can mess with the sea big time either, too many variables there also. Hiopefully Fusion can come on big time soon but otherwise it's gotta be Fission and run the risks of local disaster rather than global.
Perhaps these days will be looked back on as the birth of free power via the nuclear, and the preservation of mankind and the planet.
The problem with storing nuclear waste is that not many people wish to live next to giant containers filled with still harmful nuclear waste. If every home invested in solar energy and lunar energy in their homes, we would be helping the environment. I and others don't accept that Nuclear is the "Only" way forwards. With lots of little Nuclear power plants dotted about the country, I would rather see a windfarm than see a potentially harmful if not kept in order nuclear power plant. Yes windfarms are noisy, so why not stick them out in the sea? Yes windfarms is not the answer because we would need billions to run this world and there just isn't realisticness in that. solar energy plants and lunar power stations would be the solution or we provide our own solar energy. That means no more huge gas or electric bills-ever! Solar power is clean, not harmful either. So we say fuck the green peace activists? Thought we were hippies? I oppose Nuclear as it is very dangerous stuff. You only have to know what it can do to people who work with nuclear long term. They end up with cancer, die earlier and have illnesses as a result. That is what it means to go Nuclear. Nuclear waste takes well over a decade to deteriorate to nothing. Surely we don't believe in dumping waste in the sea? But how do people feel about living next to Giant Nuclear wastage tanks? What if a leak happened? Look at that oil depot. Had that been a Nuclear waste plant, then anyone living within the radius of about six miles would be exposed and either die or get skin cancer and then die. Who would be willing to spend millions through tax payers money containing Nuclear waste? We know what happens to fish when they are radio active. They mutate and have three eyes and extra fins:jester: But seriously I am surprised that people think Nuclear is the "Only" way forwards. What happened to caring about our environment and our landscapes? What happened to turning our backs on Nuclear and looking at greener solutions? As a hippy, I also care about our environment. When my kids grow up, I want them to be able to run about in the fields in shorts and t shirts, not NASA space suits
Microgreneration is another promising part of the solution, it's good to see streetlights and roadsigns popping up with their own solar panels. But even if we all had our own wind turbines and solar panels on our roofs that still could not provide more than a tiny fraction of our energy needs. We need a combination of all these technologies if we have a hope... The question is skewed a bit wrong, I don't think anybody seriously suggests nuclear is the "only" solution, nuclear technology can itself only provide a small part of our energy needs. We don't have the time, money, space or inclination to build enough nuclear power stations to provide all our electricity needs (by my very rough estimate about 40 at current levels of production and consumption in Britain)
Still think solar panels can provide a lot of power. Okey not for a whole city but if every citizen had its own power supply without relying on the aged Grid, then we would save the planet from doom- but as the Earth moves slowly through the universe, i am sure we will be sucked into a blackhole.
I did sign up a year ago for notification of the public sale of micro-turbines for the use of the general public, still waiting, perhaps a reminder to go and search again. I do feel obliged myself, to at least try and participate on as generous a level as I can. Most do feel the same but seem to feel powerless due to the financial outlay of most of these products. Government should do more. We are going to keep burning the fuel to produce electricity, the public demand it, they need to go clean, they're going to promise it will be safe and keep their fingers crossed, hopefully they're proven right.
