Nuclear energy can cure what ails us. (terror, income, problems)

[burdell]

Originally Posted by Greatday

One could make the same type argument for almost any kind of power. For instance, in my area of the country, we see many hydro electric generating plants - Dams. Hoover Dam for one. One could make the argument that if Hoover Dam broke, or was otherwise damaged, it would unleash a torrent of water that would kill 100's of 1000's downstream because of the flooding.

Shall we not build hydro electric anymore?

A few large differences are that the effects of a dam breaking couldn't be wind-born for thousands of miles and wouldn't linger for thousands of years.

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by burdell

A few large differences are that the effects of a dam breaking couldn't be wind-born for thousands of miles and wouldn't linger for thousands of years.

While that may be true (distance), it certainly could impact (adversely) people for 100's of miles.

[burdell]

Originally Posted by Greatday

You suggest that there should be a limit on the size of car one can have? How about the quanities of cars? For instance, Jay Leno, a celebrity in the United States, owns over 30 cars (he is a car collector). He drives them all. Should this be prohibitied?

Unless he's a magician as well as a comedian he's only driving one at a time

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by Greatday

You suggest that there should be a limit on the size of car one can have? How about the quanities of cars? For instance, Jay Leno, a celebrity in the United States, owns over 30 cars (he is a car collector). He drives them all. Should this be prohibitied?

Just because you can buy something doesn't mean you should.
To me that is a sign of stupidity.
I mean what do you find more important, preserving the earth for future generations or indulging your (selfish) pleasures?

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by Tricky D

Originally Posted by GreatdayJust because you can buy something doesn't mean you should.
To me that is a sign of stupidity.
I mean what do you find more important, preserving the earth for future generations or indulging your (selfish) pleasures?

So you ARE saying that there should be limits put on how many cars (vehicles) someone can own.

Isn't that taking away a freedom?

[burdell]

Originally Posted by Greatday

While that may be true (distance), it certainly could impact (adversely) people for 100's of miles.

No doubt, I'm not saying we should completely dismiss the idea of nuclear energy, only that we'd better study every potential problem carefully and have a plan to deal with each in place before they occur. And when we think we have covered every potential problem, we'd better think some more because it's a safe bet we haven't thought of everything. It still remains to be seen if when all costs are considered if nuclear power is a better deal than other choices.

I have a difficult time overlooking the fact that the government that will now tell us how safe it all is is the same government that had no problem putting observers very close to nuclear tests because 'there is no danger'. And when there's a potential profit motive involved credibility lessens even more.

[Tricky D]

Originally Posted by Greatday

Isn't that taking away a freedom?

Sure I'll take away your freedom to f**k up the earth.
I don't care if you wanna f**k up yourself, that is your prerogative, but wanting to f**k up the earth isn't.

[Mooseketeer]

Originally Posted by Greatday

One could make the same type argument for almost any kind of power. For instance, in my area of the country, we see many hydro electric generating plants - Dams. Hoover Dam for one. One could make the argument that if Hoover Dam broke, or was otherwise damaged, it would unleash a torrent of water that would kill 100's of 1000's downstream because of the flooding.

Shall we not build hydro electric anymore?

I think the legacy of a dam burst and that of a nuclear accident are somehow on a different scale.
Nuclear waste hangs around pretty much forever and carries on wrecking havoc with bio-diversity as well as creating genetic mutations in humans we haven't even begun to understand.

A friend of my father was a scientist who worked on the Atomic tests in Mururoa for the French government and he thought Nuclear was not something we could control and was not safe. I remember him telling me we were all deluding ourselves because it seemed such an easy solution to our problems.

[Mooseketeer]

Originally Posted by Greatday

So you ARE saying that there should be limits put on how many cars (vehicles) someone can own.

Isn't that taking away a freedom?

When your "freedom" to ruin the earth takes away from the Freedom of others to live in a world not completely polluted or ruined for thousands of years, yep I do believe your "Freedom" should be restricted.

Our "Freedoms" in the West are costing people's lives, homes and livelihoods in other parts of the world. That seems pretty inconsiderate to me. Not a Freedom worth having IMO.



We all belong to the same race and all have responsibilities. We all rely on the same eco-system and biting the hands that feeds us seems pretty stupid to me.

Some of these duties do involve sacrifices. That's called being a grown-up. Sacrifices have to be made sometimes so the majority of people are not exploited, enslaved or have their habitat destroyed.

[katzenfreund]

Originally Posted by Mooseketeer

I think the legacy of a dam burst and that of a nuclear accident are somehow on a different scale.
Nuclear waste hangs around pretty much forever and carries on wrecking havoc with bio-diversity as well as creating genetic mutations in humans we haven't even begun to understand.

A friend of my father was a scientist who worked on the Atomic tests in Mururoa for the French government and he thought Nuclear was not something we could control and was not safe. I remember him telling me we were all deluding ourselves because it seemed such an easy solution to our problems.

I agree with that. How many thousands of people will die of cancer due to Chernobyl and how many children have gotten cancer and birth defects due to all of this? Radiation knows no boundaries. At the time we lived in Germany and were told not to eat rye bread, don't drink the milk, no mushrooms etc. The mushrooms from certain parts of eastern Europe are very high in radiation to this day and will continue to be for a long time. All the milk from there was turned into milk powder and no doubt mixed in with some type of food, consumed by unsuspecting consumers. The dangers are just to big IMO.

Even if the Nuclear reactors in this country are safer, there is still plenty of room for mistakes and errors. Just last summer there was an incident in a swedish nuclear power plant that showed design flaws and other problems. Luckily a major catastrophe didn't happen, but it could have... to close of a call.

Then there is that pesky storage problem. We have NOT found a way to safely store the nuclear waste and transporting this stuff through the country is very dangerous also.

Rather than consuming more and more energy we need to find ways to curb our energy consumption by building more efficient cars, appliances, using alternative fuels when possible, such as solar (which has great promise and is safe and renable). But what is happening? We are still building cars that are total gas guzzlers and energy hog appliances. We are not investing as we should in renewable energy, but that is really no surprise, considering who is in the White house.