Printable View
What're everyone's opinions on nuclear power? Do you think it's a good way to get power, or do you think that it's too risky to be worth it?
I'm pro-nuclear power, but only if the tightest safety measures are met. Even if there's one serious incident then the plant has to be shut down or put under strict watch. There can't be a second accident.
Anything that offers an alternative to coal is a plus in my book. Nuclear technology has come a long way, so it's pretty darn safe nowadays.
clean, efficient and with very little waste, whats the problem kiddies?
The fear of another serious accident, like what happened in Chernobyl, or in Three Mile Island or in Windscale.Quote:
Originally Posted by gokufusionss1
pro-nuclear, not as sustainable as I'd like, but seems to be the most immediate band-aid
Mmm the only problem is the nuclear waste..i dont know how people are going to responsibly take those out of the equation without suffering loss in money. Hydrogen for the win...but we need more research and nuclear for the time being sounds good until we get something better.
Maybe we can use the bombs we have for something useful :P
Nuclear weapons are there as a deterrent to use within themselves and as a quick alternative to bloody,soul destroying conventional warfare though personally I think the world would be a safer place without nuclear superpowers altogether.
This thread isn't even about nuclear weapons, dude.
Personally, I'm all for Nuclear power.
And yet everyone else is not allowed to have nukes..nice D:
i'm a bit of both it's liable but if it goes wrong it can cause a hell lot of chaos and i mean alot a serious accident could whipe out an entire city leaving it uninhabitable
cheap fuel, the plants make jobs for the surrounding area, and people are finally trying to be properly safe about it (like making sure water is cooled before dumped back into the lakes. Apparently different water temperatures kill the inhabitants xD)
Well I may have taken it slightly wrong, but...
How I see it-
Two forms of nuclear power. Fission and Fusion.
For me Nuclear is the way to go. Fission can blow up in your face and cause some serious problems if not used responsibly but it is clean(other then waste but meh) efficent and powerful.
And once we gain the ability of fusion we will do away with many of the negatives of Fission(or so what I have read on it says) and keep the benifits. So Nuclear seems to be the obvious way to go. Solar and Wind can be undependable. Hydro is quite picky and can cause problems(or so I have read). Shrug. Why not nuclear?
It's a great thing, but bombing japan TWICE was stupid, threats or maybe even once was sufficient.
A large town becoming uninhabitable has already happened. The town of Pripyat was home to around 300,000 people - probably more, I'm not certain about the number. It was a town built almost exclusively for the workers of the nearby power plant and their families. It was right beside Chernobyl. Now the place is uninhabitable for roughly the next 100,000 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoden
Anti-Nuclear. But that might because I'm a total hippie. Honestly, I just don't like it, it's unsafe, even with very strict security measures, TIME did an article on how easy it would be for people to trigger a meltdown. It was very disturbing. And I'm very anti.
Even after both bombs, there was an attempted coup by the military commanders to overthrow the Emperor and continue the war against the Americans. Estimates of a convention invasion put casualty figures in the millions, and you can look to Okinawa to see what happens when the Americans successfully take a civilian area (130,000+ dead, largely from suicides.). Japan was training children, boys and girls, to fight the Americans with bamboo spears, to roll under tanks with explosives strapped to themselves, and so forth.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbomber72000
If you want to imagine an occupied Japan, think of Iraq, except with the entire population having the dedication to removing the occupiers and moreover having the direct mandate of their God, essentially.
The bombs were horrible, but they were necessary. Even after Hiroshima their failure to surrender showed the strength of their will.
And to be fair, the effects of nuclear explosions were not known to scientists at the time. When reports of radiation sickness came in, many experts believed it to be Japanese fabrication: after tests by the US soldiers were sent into the nuked zones to see how fast they could be taken. If these events had not occurred, it's possible nukes would have been brought to bear much more readily in later conflicts, when they existed in greater numbers and had higher yields.
And to be honest, the US experimented in its own country first, at Trinity. All the US knew, basically, is that the bombs blew things up. And they missed in Nagasaki. They only hit an industrial zone. The damage could have been much greater if they had been on target.
Off topic - I remember a friend of mine telling me about when he went to Japan he met a man who was in World War II. He was in a submarine heading for an American ship. He was a suicide bomber. He was a mile away from the American ship when he received a radio call, telling him to turn back because the war was over.
Off topic again - my friend also went to Hiroshima. He told me that there is a branch office of the Osaka Bank with the silhouette of a man on the wall and steps of the building. He was sitting with an elbow on one knee and a hand on his chin, when the bomb went off only 500 yards away. He was vapourised in the explosion, but the radiation left his outline burned onto the stone wall and steps.
http://nikki.sundark.com/photos/hiro...-04/shadow.jpg
http://www.uchiyama.nl/fotogalerij/p...hiroshima8.jpg
Um what's wrong with coal. Where i live that's what our economy revols around if it's gone then the methane will be gone and my parents are out of their jobs. in fact if i go back to the top of the hill in the back pasture i can see 5 mines. I say no cause then there will be heavy lay offs for the other energy companies and i'll have no where to live because i'll have no money.Quote:
Originally Posted by omnitarian
Its a great thing to have. It creates more power and lasts longer than any other form of energy we have. Coal, Oil and anything like that is becoming more scarce so we need an alternative. Even more so when people are consuming more energy then before.
I would also like to take this chance to say that(from the looks of it) everyone who voted nuclear power is a bad idea is an idiot because they though we were talking about weapons which means they didn't even read the thread. If you voted against it and knew what the thread was about then you are excused....but everyone else=moron!
I'm anti because I think fossil fuels will last forever and will be the best way to go.
That was sarcasm... Right?Quote:
Originally Posted by lordblazer
No way man. If we create a machine that speeds time up we can just throw bones into it and wait for the rich oils to flow forth!
darn i was found out :(Quote:
Originally Posted by nik0tine
lol but thats really what the typical american thinks just poking a little fun at it.lol OKlahoma really doesnt want a nuclear power plant but every state around it has one XD they'll be using nuclear power pretty soon.
Thermodepolymerization 4tw.Quote:
Originally Posted by edczxcvbnm
HOLY CRAP! I wish I knew more about it rather than the little bit that I had just read. We should so totally be doing this at full blast and then sell it to other countries! We will become invincible!Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Pro, we have the technology to make it safe. And we should start relying on that tehnology, by upgrading nukeplants, and buidling new ones. Compared to coal, and other powerplants Nuke power is really clean.
Well, we can't make it completely safe, but we can't do that with anything. Still, I think that we have the capacity and desire to make Nuke plants of sufficient safety to be worth investing in.Quote:
Originally Posted by CloudSquallandZidane
Incidentally, what do others thing of so-called microgeneration? Some numbers estimate such things (Ie each household having it's own small form of power generation) would be overall cheaper than nuke power, but I'm more interested in the idea due to being self-reliant and able to continue using electrical items in the event of grid failure/disaster and so forth.
ed - I agree, TDP is a very interesting and promising area. The very reason we ever started using fossil fuels is because they are actually surprisingly compact and very useful/versatile. To be able to manufacture oil is quite a startling achievement. Incidentally, a couple of pieces of info on the thing are here and here. I can't find much about the actual equations in the process itself, however. Finally, the Changing World Tech official site. They run the only TDP plant I know to exist and operate commercially at this time, in Carthage, MO.
What is TDP exactly? How can it create oil or energy? :confused:
EDIT: Sorry, I didn't see MILF's links.
Pro. But obviously in concordance with safety measures and controls. I hear disposal of the residue is extremely expensive and difficult, but all in all I'd say nuclear is alot better than fossil-fuel based energy sources.
Disposal of Nuke Waste is very expensive and must be done under the highest saftly levels and all of that junk. But the cost(I would like to think) would be off set by that we would reduce the number of overall power plants which cuts tons of things such as jobs, overhead and other things which can be shifted to waste disposal.
Even if it costs more after that, I say it is worth it for a cleaner and less poluted earth.
I still don't get why we don't just blast nuclear waste into the center of the sun...
Just imagine if there was a problem with the launch, and the rocket blew up in the atmosphere. Nuclear radiation would be launched all over the world. Bad idea. It's not even worth attempting because if we screw up just once it'd be bad news for all of us.Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm my own MILF
Ah, fair enough. Wait a couple of decades until things get more reliable, I guess...Quote:
Originally Posted by nik0tine
The only trouble with nuke power is the treat that someone would decide that it would be a good target, either in a war, or as part of terrorism. That and the meltdown risks. But it is a cheap and plentiful source of energy, which might be needed when oil runs out.
Mixed bag.
goku fusionssj1
Thats what they said about mako!Quote:
clean, efficient and with very little waste, whats the problem kiddies?
I am pro though - nuclear is way better.
Bipper