Debate - nuclear power?

miguelanime · Heimin (Commoner) Joined: May 26, 2005 Posts: 89

In my country there a few nuclear pants, and the political decision is no to build anymore (a nuclear plant has a life time +/- of 40 years). But still there are a lot of ecologist people asking to dismantle the existing ones.... very easy to say: we dont want nuclear power! (but dont quit me my TV, my washmachine, fridge, etc). Its always the same: the cars are poluting the air, but the others car not mine... Nowadays, in summer have electricity cuts because power failure: ask a ecologist and will respond: use clean energy source... How many windgenerators do you have to use to be equivalent to one nuclear power???
We have too termics plants, a lot of more contaminants, and people prefer them to the nuclearsn plants. Ok, radioactive waste is a problem, but with the actual electricity consume there is no better alternative (at least until will be developed the nuclear fusion)

x10afreedom · Posted: Thu Jul 21, 2005 12:50 am Post subject:

lol you make it sound so horrible. i don't find electricity as a problem at least from where i live. i mean there are black outs but i don't see that often. i guess if we really need it then we would result to it. but i don't think it much of a necessity.

Harangar · Heimin (Commoner) Joined: May 23, 2005 Posts: 76

Gday Im studying civil engineering and I'll give you a principle used when designing things. Its called Limit State Design, basically we overestimate the load a structure will take, then we will underestimate the capacity that structure has to take that load. How much we overestimate and underestimate depends on the structure, something like a nuclear power station could probably survive a 711 crashing into it, earthquakes and the lot, and are decommisioned after a certain time.

Currently we do not reuse alot of the nuclear waste that can be reused, which is a fair bit, there is still alot of waste left over.

What the main issue is though, is not increasing the power output, but reducing the amount of energy required in countries like the USA, Australia and a few others. I'm from Australia and I'm disgusted we pulled out of the Kyoto protocol.

I personally think the world's doomed neway because societies that use too much power are blinded to what we are doing to our world.

As much as I hate to say it, a virus needs to take out problably 7/8 of America and a big chunk out of Australia and other countries that are destroying our world.

Sharp · Conscript Joined: Jul 16, 2005 Posts: 124

All in the name of your stupid air conditioners... I mean, think about life without nuclear power! The blackout in that north american grid around NewYork and Ontario would have probably occured 20 years earlier without. Your computers would have never been designed in the first place, and you wouldn't be driving your good looking SUVs.

CGY · Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 11:44 am Post subject:

ValMar · Heimin (Commoner) Joined: Oct 18, 2004 Posts: 68

we'll be like nepalians without electricity.

i agree with nuclear plants, but it should be built a safe distance from the city.

miguelanime · Heimin (Commoner) Joined: May 26, 2005 Posts: 89

I want to add some few things:
First, as I said before, YES to the nuclear power, cause dont think that there is actually an alternative to them. But not whatever kind of nuclear plant. I wonder if an accident like Chernobyl could happen nowadays, probably not. The nuclear power must be oversee but independent organism in all the countrys with nuclear facilities (US: Nuclear Regulatory Commission - NRC), and probably also an international similar. Think that in Chernobyl were a security fail conditionated to lack of money in old URSS. The same way, perhaps shouldnt exist nuclear pants of private property, just to ensure that the safety is not under the money profit (think of Montgomery Burns and Homer...).

DRK · Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 5:55 pm Post subject:

Well... Until we reach a method of converting sunlight to power alot more efficent (such as the plants in photosynthesis) we need more nuclear power... it beats using fossil fuel since its gonna run out one day..

And ... if homer and burns was in charge, i would leave the country Laughing

Urax · newbie! Joined: Jul 18, 2005 Posts: 39 Location: Stockholm

Well in my countr (Sweden) we are deactivating our nuclear plants. I think we only have one or two plants left. And we're doing just fine I've never experienced a black out except if there was a storm and some electric cable was destroyed. Our other power sorce is only renewable power sources. So we have a really good example for how we can make things work whithout nuclear plants. And there are great risks with the exposal of the used uranium this year one of our containers had a leak and we nearly got nuclear waste into the underground water (that's the water that you get from wells).

CGY · Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 1:19 pm Post subject:

rag_gurl · Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 2:55 pm Post subject:

i think it's too dangerous. i wouldnt sacrifice plants for my own personal use. i wouldnt destory earth just so i can blow dry my hair when i could just let it dry by itself or vaccum the floor when i could sweep. people need to conserve energy.

zbeeblebrox · Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:05 pm Post subject:

yes we need it. its clean safe and vastly superior to anything else.
_________________
"ticking away the moments that make up a dull day. you fritter and waste the hours in an off-hand way"
oh and mind my spelling i tend to type fast.

CGY · Posted: Sat Jul 23, 2005 3:07 pm Post subject:

miguelanime · Heimin (Commoner) Joined: May 26, 2005 Posts: 89

naruto641 · Conscript Joined: Jul 07, 2005 Posts: 189

feh, I think war should go back to the days with just rifles. That way at least if countries are stupid enough to do wars its more fair. You shouldnt win a war by how rich your country is or how many ppl they have in the army. It should be about how well trained the army is and how good they can shoot a rifle.