nucler power, should we have it??

fredric sedric
fredric sedric's picture
Joined: 2007-05-06
User is offlineOffline
nucler power, should we have it??

the planets buggered, we all know that, but how are we gonna save it.

Here in australia we have recenly been met by a series of droughts and our dam water levels have been reaching critical levels. this has been proven to be caused by our ever increasing problem of global warming. Our current govenment has recognized this and has started taking steps to develop a nulcear power industry. unfortunatly the opposition has been rejecting the idea and has been pushing for more solar and wind power and the development of more efficiant coal use. they are also arguing that nuclear power is unsafe and unreliable, and unfortunatly the majority of people are beliving them.

i personaly belive that nuclear is the only way to go if we have any hope of salvaging whats left of the planet.

so what do u think, is nuclear power the only way to save the planet or should we be looking for alternitave forms of power....... or should we not give a danm about future generations and just rape the world of its ability to support living organisms.


Guruite
Guruite's picture
Joined: 2006-12-17
User is offlineOffline
Oh... Hell lets rape and

Oh... Hell lets rape and pillage!!

Or... we could turn to nuclear... at least that is where I see us going to next - that used to split hydrogen for portable fuel (like the new gas)

I also recently watched a thing on discovery talking about helium 3 on the moon... that could be the new thing

Unless there is some shift, solar wont be able to fully cut it.

As for the 'environment', I believe that our fuel (not ocunting coal.. only nat gas and Oil) will run out so soon that we wont be able to do much harm in the long run (if we would kep it up for another couple of hundred years after that... then yeah I think we could do permanent damage)

as for unsafe and unreliable... jeeze it is pretty safe... just takes a long time to reduce the radioactivity of the waste ...


fredric sedric
fredric sedric's picture
Joined: 2007-05-06
User is offlineOffline
Quote:as for unsafe and

[quote]as for unsafe and unreliable... jeeze it is pretty safe... just takes a long time to reduce the radioactivity of the waste ...

[/quote]

my thoughts exactly, unfortunatly alot of the australian public are dickheads that listen to the media too much


Guruite
Guruite's picture
Joined: 2006-12-17
User is offlineOffline
Well, at least we can

Well, at least we can contain the waste... not like fossil fuels that just get put off into the atmosphere - plus a small part of it goes to recycling (haha, Even though I don't believe in recycling most things... *I do believe in it... just not support it*)

Where I live, Utah, there was recently some controvercy surrounding the Yukkah (I dont know how to spell it) Mountian progect where they would store the waste...

People complained that it would spill and contaminate the groundwater.... - But I heard some fact somewhere (so you know its credible! :P ) that they ran tests on these barrels and they would survive a train running into them... (or a lot of damage... without leaking)


fredric sedric
fredric sedric's picture
Joined: 2007-05-06
User is offlineOffline
lol, well here in australia

lol, well here in australia most of our land is desert....... i dont think we r gonna have a problem storing the waste


Scythian
Joined: 2006-10-09
User is offlineOffline
WHere i live, south carolina

WHere i live, south carolina there is a nuclear plant so far it has run very well, and seems very safe. Therefore i think it is safer than the media claims. Not that the media puts out enough good, reliable info anyways


DeamonCohln
DeamonCohln's picture
Joined: 2007-09-23
User is offlineOffline
Woah there. Let's think this

Woah there. Let's think this through. Coal, oil, yadda yadda all burn and pollute. That's pretty much a fact (the exact amount is disputed, but let's not focus on that right now).

Nuclear energy may be the shining beacon of awesome we need to help us out of this funk. In America, we could dump all of the little (not as dangerous as you think anyway) pellets of radioactive material in a desert in Nevada. Australia has deserts too (or so I hear :P).

Transportation of the material is safe and the conceived nuclear explosions of all of this stuff have been pretty much debunked (thanks Penn & Teller).

I have been living in the shadow of Fermes, a nuclear plant in Southeast Michigan. One major bad thing has happened, and that was fixed. It's not pretty much safe and the view of the tower from Monroe is actually pretty cool. I say more plants. Convert as much as possible.


HeliosOfTheSun
Joined: 2006-07-04
User is offlineOffline
Nuclear power. Im for it.

Nuclear power. Im for it. But, dont think of me with a baby nuke for my new engine in my car... Nuclear power should be monitered by an nonprofitable/goverment oragization. We all know what happened in Urakine(sp?). But there are problems like the following:

1. Theres a small amount of U-235 (along woth its isotopes and Pu)

2. The waste is radioactive for.... 25 000 years.

3. Who wants to drive to Utah mountians from NY with radioactive material, can you say terriost attack?

But nuclear is eviromentally clean and to produces more energy than coal, but.... Im thinking anything nuclear, it should be fission, yet we can only master it for a couple of mintues.

My new opinion.... Solar and Wind.

*EDIT* Correction on fission, I meant fusion. Thats a my bad.


DeamonCohln
DeamonCohln's picture
Joined: 2007-09-23
User is offlineOffline
Here's the thing though, if

Here's the thing though, if there is a attack on a transport of the material for a reactor only...then we have some really dumb terrorists because it isn't going to do all that much...

The transport medium is seriously strong and the material itself needs to be around for a long time before it does much damage.


HeliosOfTheSun
Joined: 2006-07-04
User is offlineOffline
DeamonCohln wrote:Here's the

[quote=DeamonCohln]Here's the thing though, if there is a attack on a transport of the material for a reactor only...then we have some really dumb terrorists because it isn't going to do all that much...

The transport medium is seriously strong and the material itself needs to be around for a long time before it does much damage.[/quote]

This might be true, but the media will take advantage of nuclear transport as a scary thing. Then who wants at stop at thier city for gas? Its true reactors are useless, but the U rods that run a nuclear power plant are dangerous. I am not worried about it really spilling as much as people taking the rods and blowing them up. The major reason we dont sends the rods in space is well for... If the ship blows in the air. Or even worse, if they put it in our lakes, rivers, or water supplies.


fredric sedric
fredric sedric's picture
Joined: 2007-05-06
User is offlineOffline
lol, u americans r too

lol, u americans r too worried about terrorist attacks.

For starters your run of the mill terrorist is to hyped up in religious extacy to get out and do something creative like attack transports and make dirty bombs and such.

secondly the reason u have to worry bout terrorists is cause it works on yous. here in australia the only way a terrorist cauld cause real anger and fear in the population is by attacking a brewery or hijacking a beer truck and causing the pub to have no beer. hence we dont care about many attacks on us..... and thoes we do care about we r joking about within the week


HeliosOfTheSun
Joined: 2006-07-04
User is offlineOffline
Yea we are normally worried

Yea we are normally worried about terriost since they killed thousands in 2001. And they use car bombs on our troops in Iraq and Afganstan. Austrilia never had a "9/11".


fredric sedric
fredric sedric's picture
Joined: 2007-05-06
User is offlineOffline
we diddnt have 9/11 but we

we diddnt have 9/11 but we did have the bali bombings
it may have not been on the same magnitude as 9/11 but because we have a smaller population and the fact that shit like that doesnt ever happen to australia it fairly gave us a kick in the arse
plus it highlighted the fact that indonesia does have large terrorist cells which the indonesian government sypathises with. indonisia is just one little illigal boat trip away from australia so they are a real threat

and dont u worry, our troops r over in the middle east aswell so they r being attacked too. infact when u first went to war on afghanistan, australias S.A.S troops were over there eliminating priority tragets hours before the americans were.

and im sorry man but the american troops arnt trained properly in rebuilding a country. yous have no trouble going in and fucking up every bastard holding a gun but the reason u's r copping thoes car bombs is cause u's r pissing off too many poeple. the auzzie troops cop less attacks cause they r efficient in rebuilding towns.

i do realize that u's r very patriotic towards your troops, but im hoping none of wot i sayed is offencive as i too am a proud supporter of the war.........even though it could be managed better


HeliosOfTheSun
Joined: 2006-07-04
User is offlineOffline
I know little of the Bali

I know little of the Bali bombings. I know yall have troops, not as much as the UK (but a hell of alot more than Romainia). I already know of the irrogance in the US attack squad, I live in New Orleans. They were sent to stop the unrest in the city. I support our troops because I hate seeing them die for this stupid ass war, its better than not caring.