Nuclear energy can cure what ails us. (enemies, global warming, weapons)

[jufrbo]

Right now, one of the biggest problems we face is clean renewable energy. The answer has been around for decades. Nuclear energy.

There is a train that travels from Avignon, France to Paris at a speed of 200 mph. It is completely carbon free, and non-polluting. This train is fueled by plutonium from nuclear power plants and weapons. It reduces radioactivity in nuclear waste by 90%.

In the past 50 years, nuclear energy has killed less than 100 people, 56 of these at Chernobyl. In 50 years the WHO estimates that 100 million people have died from air pollution from combustion products. Poisoning from coal smoke killed 5,000 in London in 1952. In five years in Europe wind turbines have killed over 200 people.

High level waste from the UK and France is stored as chunks of glass packed in stainless steel containers buried a few meters underground. La Hague, Normandy is where France's supply of nuclear waste is buried. Standing directly above this site the radiation level is only .25 microsieverts an hour, 20x less than you'd find in any long distance passenger plane.

Each year CO2 emissions if turned solid would make a mountain 16 miles in circumference.

source- James Lovelock

This is the world's solution to global warming, carbon emissions, and foreign dependancy on oil. Unfortunatley hippies from the sixties are now in power in all levels of government. They have an irrational fear of anything nuclear. Big oil won't let on because cars could run for quite some time off of batteries charged by nuclear power.

This is the way to go.

[burdell]

I've read that when everything is factored in, cost of the plant, cost to raze it as they have a finite life, cost to store nuclear waste, operating costs, nuclear produced electriciy is actually some of the most expensive produced.

[UnderTheLiveOaks]

Nuclear energy is better than coal, etc, but it is REALLY expensive and still produces nasty waste.

I'd rather see more energy from renewable sources.

[burdell]

Originally Posted by CarolinaBredChicagoan

Nuclear energy is better than coal, etc, but it is REALLY expensive and still produces nasty waste.

I'd rather see more energy from renewable sources.

The sun sends far more energy to earth than several thousand nuclear plants could produce, we need to learn how to utilize it.

[Huckleberry3911948]

IMHO
china syndrome lied, thanks a lot jane, thanks to nuks, france is energy independent.
they dont have to fight a war every 10 years, they dont make their enemies rich.
germans lost WWII bek they ran out of gas.
got fuel?

[jufrbo]

Originally Posted by CarolinaBredChicagoan

I'd rather see more energy from renewable sources.

The renewable sources are a joke, at this time wind and solar are simply too weak produce the power needed.

[jufrbo]

Originally Posted by burdell

The sun sends far more energy to earth than several thousand nuclear plants could produce, we need to learn how to utilize it.

That's fine to learn how to use it more efficiently, but for the here and now we need to take a serious look at nuke energy, even if it is just for the next 50 years or so while we further study how to make solar more efficient.

[GregW]

Coal and heavy oil combustion plants produce cheaper electricity because the environmental cost of air pollution and solid waste disposal are not factored into the costs. I favor a complete replacement of base load coal and oil fired powerplants with government owned and operated nuclear fission (light water, CANDU and High Temp Gas cooled mix) powerplants. This is clearly a place where government ownership is cheaper and more reliable than the absurd mess we are burdened with since the industry was deregulated and the speculators ripped off everyone. Remember ENRON?

BTW - I am a 1970's hippy.

[burdell]

Originally Posted by JustinFromBoise

The renewable sources are a joke, at this time wind and solar are simply too weak produce the power needed.

So we bury our heads in the sand and ignore them?

Wind is actually produced in large part by the sun so it's just another part of solar energy. They're not too weak to produce the power needed, we just haven't learned how yet

We went from Kitty Hawk to the moon in 66 years unaided by computers and the considerably expanded knowledge base we now enjoy. Why is there any reason not to believe we can't make the same amount of progress much more quickly in finding ways to utilize the huge amount power the sun throws at earth everyday?

[jufrbo]

Originally Posted by burdell

So we bury our heads in the sand and ignore them?

Wind is actually produced in large part by the sun so it's just another part of solar energy. They're not too weak to produce the power needed, we just haven't learned how yet

We went from Kitty Hawk to the moon in 66 years unaided by computers and the considerably expanded knowledge base we now enjoy. Why is there any reason not to believe we can't make the same amount of progress much more quickly in finding ways to utilize the huge amount power the sun throws at earth everyday?

Like I said, it is fine to further research them, and hopefully in 66 years we can fully utilize them. But for now, nuclear is the way to go.