Do You Trust or Support the Nuclear Power Industry?
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nope, until they have a viable plan on disposal of nuclear waste... absolutely not.... by the way disposal is NOT the same thing as storage...
That is my biggest issue with nuclear power. Next is the cost does not balance out when one calculates when liability is factored. Nuclear has to be too heavily subsidized by tax money to make it even approach being profitable. This does not take into account the the process of mining for and processing the uranium. Mining companies left Navajo land and water heavily contaminated. They just left. They didn't even bother trying to clean up before they left when the price of uranim fell out.
Plus, we do not reprocess fuel rods in America, which increases the amount of space needed for disposal. The same space of which we do not have.
After the Japan incident though, I feel safer that we can handle nuclear if we can clean up our mining waste, reprocess the fuel rods to decrease disposal space, find a place that IS NOT on Native American land for disposal, and bring the start up and liability costs down.
No. They still say nuclear power is safe. with no disposal of the waste and no fewer than 8 catastrophic failures.
They have plants producing twice as long as they were designed for.
The energy is expensive.
They lie about radiation releases
So what is there to trust?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazzyTallGuy
Based on their statements in the last week I don't trust them much. The Vermont Yankee plant has had numerous safety and environmental problems yet it is still allowed to operate. They are also downplaying the earthquake risk at the Diablo Canyon plant in California. The industry as a whole is dealing with older reactors that have similar design to the one's causing problems in Japan that REALLY need to brought off-line and either modernized or replaced.
Operating a nuclear power plant is like driving a racing car. It is inherently risky and there is no way to guarantee an accident will never happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
We need our heads examined if anyone believes that nonsense. Neither you nor anyone else knows anything more than you are told. Here's something I bet you don't know .....
There is a long and well established history of the public being kept in the dark ... especially when it involves incompetence or misconduct that threatens public safety or health.
With regard to nuclear energy and weapons .... there has always been an underlying technological arrogance and willingness to engage in extremely risky, poorly considered actions that ignore those risks and their long term consequences.
When ever human beings are involved ... the potential always exists for mistakes, miscalculations, incompetent decisions, and outright corruption. In the case of radiation, the immediate consequences cannot be calculated, nor can disasters be contained. Damages done can have effects which last for generations, affecting future generations not even born yet.
Furthermore, it's not just what is done in the United States, and how well monitored that may or may not be, accidents and disasters anywhere around the world can have negative consequences all around the world.
Until the safety of nuclear power generation can be classified as totally, 100% fail safe ... including the safe disposal of nuclear waste .... continuing to expand this nightmare is an extreme act of technological foolishness and stupidity.
All good responses, but GuyNTexas, yours is the best in the thread that I've read so far.
Nuclear power plants invite catastrophe, as we have just been tragically reminded. It is a deadly and dangerous technology that we knew 30 years ago to be too risky and expensive for our future.
Many of those who support it today are the youngsters of the today's political left, who have been thoroughly indoctrinated in the church of global warming. And that bogeyman so completely preoccupies them that they have lost all perspective as to the real dangers that can face us - especially if we make poor choices. And trading carbon emissions for cesium-137 and strontium-90 could not be a poorer choice.
Nope. It's dangerous to the environment and the people's health. I think they need to build a solar power plant. The sun is free and doesn't cause more pollution.
All good responses, but GuyNTexas, yours is the best in the thread that I've read so far.
Nuclear power plants invite catastrophe, as we have just been tragically reminded. It is a deadly and dangerous technology that we knew 30 years ago to be too risky and expensive for our future.
Many of those who support it today are the youngsters of the today's political left, who have been thoroughly indoctrinated in the church of global warming. And that bogeyman so completely preoccupies them that they have lost all perspective as to the real dangers that can face us - especially if we make poor choices. And trading carbon emissions for cesium-137 and strontium-90 could not be a poorer choice.
But carbon dioxide is sooooooo carbon!!!
It's actually quite sad .... everything is now upside down, and inside out.
CO2 is bad .... Plutonium Good .... and now .... the experts are saying:
These days I'm finding I can stomach less and less of O'Reilly's show....and the appearance of "experts" like this one play no small part. 5 minutes of reckless irresponsibility that, tragically, will ease the minds of many of FNC's devout on this subject.
When humans are totally removed from the operating process and A.I. robots are perfected to the Mr. Spock level of reason and efficiency to run nuclear plants, well, then maybe I'll get on board the nuclear energy train. After all, how ironic is THIS:
Japan may build robots to play the violin, run marathons and preside over weddings, but it has not deployed any of the machines to help repair its crippled reactors. While robots are commonplace in the nuclear power industry, with EU engineers building one that can climb walls through radioactive fields, the electric power company running Japan's Fukushima Dai-ichi plant has not deployed any for the nuclear emergency.
Japan a robot power everywhere except at nuclear plant - Yahoo!7 (http://au.news.yahoo.com/tech-news/a/-/technology/9031498/japan-a-robot-power-everywhere-except-at-nuclear-plant/ - broken link)
Until humans become as infallible as robots with backups upon backups against mechanical failure, no thanks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
well, then maybe I'll get on board the nuclear energy train. After all, how ironic is THIS:
