Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-21-2008, 11:04 AM
 
Location: Boise
2,684 posts, read 6,871,444 times
Reputation: 1018

Advertisements

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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-21-2008, 12:43 PM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,298 posts, read 54,154,649 times
Reputation: 40621
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2008, 12:47 PM
 
7,330 posts, read 15,344,577 times
Reputation: 3800
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2008, 12:51 PM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,298 posts, read 54,154,649 times
Reputation: 40621
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaBredChicagoan View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2008, 12:53 PM
 
Location: southern california
61,289 posts, read 87,214,458 times
Reputation: 55551
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?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2008, 12:54 PM
 
Location: Boise
2,684 posts, read 6,871,444 times
Reputation: 1018
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaBredChicagoan View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2008, 12:56 PM
 
Location: Boise
2,684 posts, read 6,871,444 times
Reputation: 1018
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2008, 12:57 PM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,478 posts, read 59,627,700 times
Reputation: 24860
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2008, 01:00 PM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,298 posts, read 54,154,649 times
Reputation: 40621
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinFromBoise View Post
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?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2008, 01:03 PM
 
Location: Boise
2,684 posts, read 6,871,444 times
Reputation: 1018
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top