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.
Wind and Solar power much more enviro, I remember the Nuke plant in Toms River, always having leaks, and shut downs. Facility, now defunct, as I recall.
I'm not sure which Toms River you're talking about. There is not (nor was there ever) a nuclear power plant in TR. There was a chemical processing plant called Ciba Geigy that caused quite a bit of contamination and is now a super fund site if I recall.
There is a nuclear plant in Lacey Township which is still running and supplying power. I grew up within 10 miles of it and it never concerned me.
I'd like to see us move to wind and solar power though. I'm hoping the cost of solar cells drops and their efficiency improves so I can cover my roof with them and get off the grid. Plenty of room in the basement for batteries!
As New Jersey residents, what do you say to building a nuclear power plant in the Garden State?
I say go for it.
Clean, carbon-free "juice".
Our increasing populace, of predominately democrating voting, minority citizens will need source of clean energy. Nukes is fine w/me, the French use it why can't we.
fine -- nuclear for the "now", and wind/wave/solar/etc. for the "future"...
Obviously, the situation is just the opposite.
When nuclear is perfected, I will be the first to sign up.
Until then, it is a last gap measure, being among the most costly and dangerous, and only to be resorted to when there is nothing else that will fit the bill.
When nuclear is perfected, I will be the first to sign up.
Until then, it is a last gap measure, being among the most costly and dangerous, and only to be resorted to when there is nothing else that will fit the bill.
its probably the least costly and least dangerous.
in reality, the reason your liberal polticians are opposed to it has everythign to do with who is lining their pockets and nothing to do with safety, cost effectiveness and national security.
France is powered by nukes. Nuff said. If they can do it safely, we certainly can also. It's a big world. There are plenty of places to store the byproducts.
Let's start building!
-Marc
Problem is, there is no guaranteed safe way of storing the waste for the long long long period in which it is radioactive.
Problem is, there is no guaranteed safe way of storing the waste for the long long long period in which it is radioactive.
There is no guaranteed safe way of doing anything in life. It doesn't mean we stop doing things.
There are many remote areas of the globe where bunkers can be built to accomodate the waste. In the event of failure, which won't happen, nobody would be harmed save for a few isolated animals.
Or, we could launch the waste into space, never to be seen or heard from again. It could be aimed at a black hole where it wouldn't even be noticed given the amounts of native ambient radiation.
So if someone disagrees with you they are a propagandist. But if they agree with you, they must be what, let me guess: Enlightened?
-Marc
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.
