[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Guns - westslope - Jan 26, 2022 - 10:58pm
 
COVID-19 - westslope - Jan 26, 2022 - 10:40pm
 
Wordle - daily game - Steely_D - Jan 26, 2022 - 10:06pm
 
One small 'beef' i have with RP - BillG - Jan 26, 2022 - 9:50pm
 
In My Room - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jan 26, 2022 - 8:48pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jan 26, 2022 - 7:47pm
 
music that makes you dance with big wavy gestures - R_P - Jan 26, 2022 - 7:00pm
 
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests - Red_Dragon - Jan 26, 2022 - 6:38pm
 
Supreme Court: Who's Next? - Red_Dragon - Jan 26, 2022 - 5:31pm
 
King Crimson - miamizsun - Jan 26, 2022 - 5:24pm
 
Neil Young - R_P - Jan 26, 2022 - 12:34pm
 
Submissions is broken - rgio - Jan 26, 2022 - 12:08pm
 
Lyrics that are stuck in your head today... - black321 - Jan 26, 2022 - 11:17am
 
Name My Band - Ohmsen - Jan 26, 2022 - 10:55am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - black321 - Jan 26, 2022 - 10:38am
 
Audio Processing - Azimuth48 - Jan 26, 2022 - 9:55am
 
Photos you haven't taken of other people... - Ohmsen - Jan 26, 2022 - 8:39am
 
RP and Life - Ohmsen - Jan 26, 2022 - 8:28am
 
Movie Quote - Steely_D - Jan 26, 2022 - 8:25am
 
Get the Quote - Ohmsen - Jan 26, 2022 - 8:19am
 
What are you listening to now? - oldviolin - Jan 26, 2022 - 7:35am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - Ohmsen - Jan 26, 2022 - 7:22am
 
Today in History - Bill_J - Jan 26, 2022 - 6:41am
 
Best movies ever? - Ohmsen - Jan 26, 2022 - 5:53am
 
Old Time and Folk - Ohmsen - Jan 26, 2022 - 5:25am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - sunybuny - Jan 26, 2022 - 5:16am
 
Won’t support you until - Ohmsen - Jan 26, 2022 - 5:06am
 
Live Concert Streams - Ohmsen - Jan 26, 2022 - 4:44am
 
Best Funk ? - Ohmsen - Jan 26, 2022 - 4:30am
 
Jazz - Ohmsen - Jan 26, 2022 - 4:06am
 
What Did You Do Today? - Steely_D - Jan 25, 2022 - 9:44pm
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - fractalv - Jan 25, 2022 - 8:17pm
 
Tax the Rich! - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 25, 2022 - 3:51pm
 
What is the meaning of this? - oldviolin - Jan 25, 2022 - 2:01pm
 
Russia - R_P - Jan 25, 2022 - 1:28pm
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - VV - Jan 25, 2022 - 1:15pm
 
New Music - R_P - Jan 25, 2022 - 1:04pm
 
Headphones for the hard of hearing? - westslope - Jan 25, 2022 - 12:27pm
 
Got a good recipe you care to share ??? - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 25, 2022 - 11:43am
 
Bitcoin - rgio - Jan 25, 2022 - 5:48am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - miamizsun - Jan 25, 2022 - 4:50am
 
Europe - Ohmsen - Jan 25, 2022 - 2:16am
 
Things You Thought Today - haresfur - Jan 24, 2022 - 11:14pm
 
Trump - westslope - Jan 24, 2022 - 4:59pm
 
Weather Out Your Window - Manbird - Jan 24, 2022 - 2:34pm
 
Evolution! - R_P - Jan 24, 2022 - 2:11pm
 
Happy Birthday! - Manbird - Jan 24, 2022 - 2:07pm
 
France - Ohmsen - Jan 24, 2022 - 11:07am
 
Joe Biden - Steely_D - Jan 24, 2022 - 9:59am
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - islander - Jan 24, 2022 - 6:53am
 
Germany - westslope - Jan 23, 2022 - 11:24pm
 
Republican Party - Steely_D - Jan 23, 2022 - 7:54pm
 
The Obituary Page - Bill_J - Jan 23, 2022 - 6:20pm
 
The Dragons' Roost - triskele - Jan 23, 2022 - 2:40pm
 
Jimi Hendrix Memorial - Ohmsen - Jan 23, 2022 - 1:52pm
 
Pictures I've taken and like. No promises! - oldviolin - Jan 23, 2022 - 12:34pm
 
Australia and New Zealand Music - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Jan 23, 2022 - 11:45am
 
Counting with Pictures - Proclivities - Jan 23, 2022 - 11:37am
 
Play the Blues - Ohmsen - Jan 23, 2022 - 11:35am
 
The war on funk is over! - Ohmsen - Jan 23, 2022 - 11:22am
 
Classical? - oldviolin - Jan 23, 2022 - 11:16am
 
I play the drums... - Ohmsen - Jan 23, 2022 - 11:01am
 
Jam! (why should a song stop) - Ohmsen - Jan 23, 2022 - 10:12am
 
What Makes You Sad? - geoff_morphini - Jan 23, 2022 - 10:12am
 
The Dragon's Roots - triskele - Jan 22, 2022 - 3:30pm
 
A motivational quote - GeneP59 - Jan 22, 2022 - 11:40am
 
What are you doing RIGHT NOW? - GeneP59 - Jan 22, 2022 - 11:15am
 
Make Scott laugh - Manbird - Jan 22, 2022 - 10:07am
 
ptooey Must Go! - islander - Jan 22, 2022 - 7:59am
 
• • • What Makes You Happy? • • •  - oldviolin - Jan 21, 2022 - 10:42pm
 
Kids say the funniest things - oldviolin - Jan 21, 2022 - 9:42pm
 
Star Trek - Manbird - Jan 21, 2022 - 8:46pm
 
Thank You Radio Paradise. - Manbird - Jan 21, 2022 - 6:14pm
 
DQ (as in 'Daily Quote') - Manbird - Jan 21, 2022 - 4:21pm
 
RightWingNutZ - westslope - Jan 21, 2022 - 4:21pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Nuclear power - saviour or scourge? Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 22, 23, 24  Next
Post to this Topic
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 23, 2011 - 5:11am

 miamizsun wrote:

There are some pretty decent reviews on Blees book on Amazon as well.

I don't know enough about this subject and I'd like to read his book, however my reading list is six books on my desk right now.

Regards
 
ok, i stayed up late and got up early reading and watching some info on what may be is a very viable alternative to this situation.

In a word, Thorium. (It's cheap, plentiful, way more efficient and you can't make bombs/weapons with it, which is why I believe the powers that be have worked to squelch it.)

Here's some easy to understand vids from howstuffworks.com






the political angle



please feel free to comment.

Umberdog

Umberdog Avatar

Location: In my body.
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 22, 2011 - 8:07pm

If it wasn't for all the money involved I'm pretty sure it would be illegal to threaten the public health like nuclear power has potential, not to mention what kinds of disasters it can cause. But when it comes to comfort, convenience, and money, everything else seems expendable.

I say it's a scourge. 

nuggler

nuggler Avatar

Location: RU Sirius ?
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 22, 2011 - 5:49pm




"The nuclear bomb, does that bother you? I just want you to think big, Henry, for chrissakes. The only place where you and I disagree is with regard to the bombing. You’re so goddamned concerned about civilians, and I don’t give a damn. I don’t care." ~ Nixon to Kissinger April 25, 1972

miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 22, 2011 - 4:39pm

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

If the claims are true (99.5% efficiency, use of spent fuel from water-cooled reactors, nuclear waste with a half-life of 200 years, enough fuel already there (i.e. no new mining) for a thousand or more years), then we don't need to wait for fusion... or at the least it will give us another 1000 years development time..
Sounds pretty good to me!
 
There are some pretty decent reviews on Blees book on Amazon as well.

I don't know enough about this subject and I'd like to read his book, however my reading list is six books on my desk right now.

Regards

MrsHobieJoe

MrsHobieJoe Avatar

Location: somewhere in Europe
Gender: Female


Posted: Mar 22, 2011 - 11:28am

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
Georges Monbiot has really put the cat among the pigeons today with his article favoring nuclear power.

Before everyone starts ditching the idea of nuclear power, take a look at this design and I'd appreciate if anyone could tell me what the drawbacks are..

(I know there must be some but the concept looks damn good to me. The danger in this is that I am neither an engineer nor a physicist so I'm not really qualified to judge)

 

Yes, I read the article in the Guardian today.

My only comment is about the title of the thread- why does it have to be "saviour or scourge?"- this isn't the X factor.  It's a useful tool but not without some significant drawbacks.
NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 22, 2011 - 11:15am

Georges Monbiot has really put the cat among the pigeons today with his article favoring nuclear power.

Before everyone starts ditching the idea of nuclear power, take a look at this design and I'd appreciate if anyone could tell me what the drawbacks are..

(I know there must be some but the concept looks damn good to me. The danger in this is that I am neither an engineer nor a physicist so I'm not really qualified to judge)
(former member)

(former member) Avatar

Location: hotel in Las Vegas
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 20, 2011 - 3:04pm



nuclear emergency plan

 

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Dec 8, 2009 - 10:10pm

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

huge manatees all over the place?
 

snerk.
ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 8, 2009 - 10:09pm

 islander wrote:

one word: Balloons.

 
huge manatees all over the place?

islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 8, 2009 - 9:49pm

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
The other thing that excites me about some of these GenIV designs is that they can be used to produce hydrogen thermochemically in addition to the electricity they produce.

I know hydrogen has major problems all of its own (transport, storage, etc.) but at least it's clean.

 
one word: Balloons.


NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 8, 2009 - 9:29pm

The other thing that excites me about some of these GenIV designs is that they can be used to produce hydrogen thermochemically in addition to the electricity they produce.

I know hydrogen has major problems all of its own (transport, storage, etc.) but at least it's clean.


NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 8, 2009 - 8:06pm

 cptbuz wrote:
I hate getting involved in these discussions but...

I have been inspecting nuke plants for over 20 years, to me they are a safe and viable energy option. One of the big concerns that people bring up is what to do about the radiological waste. By far the majority (volume-wise) of radioactive waste produced at a nuke plant is very low level contaminated trash. The good news is that over the past 20 years the amount of contaminated trash created at nuke plants has dropped significantly through better planning, the reuse of materials/tools etc. in contaminated areas. The source of high level waste is spent fuel. Sites have spent fuel storage pools, but they are fast filling up (due to operating license extentions). Dry cask storage, an above ground shielded storage 'pod', allows for safe on-site storage of spent fuel and is a system used at many sites already. Dry cask storage has created a public uproar at some sites that could potentially cause a plant to shutdown prior to the end of its licensing.

Many people argue that wind and solar are "green" energy sources while nuke power, because of the waste and potential of contamination, should not be considered 'green'.  What these arguements don't consider is the climate damage created in the manufacture of items such as fiberglass for fan blades of a wind farm, or manufacture of the panels for solar collectors. Yes, the concrete and steel used in the manufacture of a nuke plant adds a size or two to the ol' carbon foot print too, but unlike wind and solar farms, the concrete structures of a nuke plant do not need to be routinely replaced.

Finally, ground has been broken in the U.S. for a new nuke plant @ the Vogtle site in Georgia. The hope is for the new unit (one of 7 planned in the US) to be on the grid by 2017...and one last thing, nuclear power plants are not run by baffoons as depicted in movies like 'China System', or  (UGH!) the made for TV abomination 'Atomic Twister'.
 

I'm glad you joined the discussion cptbuz! What is your opinion on fast breeders? Are their claims realistic?
They seem to have pretty good fail-safes built into them and the waste has a half-life of 200 years (or low level for hundreds of thousands but so low it's not a major issue).  I don't know why we are wringing our hands looking for alternative energy sources to replace fossil fuels when this technology is just sitting there unused.

geoff_morphini

geoff_morphini Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 8, 2009 - 8:44am

 Beaker wrote:

Buffoons

China Syndrome


 
I'm a nuclear inspector Jim, not a proofreader!

cc_rider

cc_rider Avatar

Location: Bastrop
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 8, 2009 - 8:40am

 cptbuz wrote:
I hate getting involved in these discussions but...

I have been inspecting nuke plants for over 20 years,
 
Nice to hear from someone who is intimately involved with existing facilities. Thank you.

cptbuz

cptbuz Avatar

Location: Sacramento CA
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 8, 2009 - 8:38am

 Beaker wrote:

Buffoons

China Syndrome


 

damn decaf!
cptbuz

cptbuz Avatar

Location: Sacramento CA
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 8, 2009 - 8:22am

I hate getting involved in these discussions but...

I have been inspecting nuke plants for over 20 years, to me they are a safe and viable energy option. One of the big concerns that people bring up is what to do about the radiological waste. By far the majority (volume-wise) of radioactive waste produced at a nuke plant is very low level contaminated trash. The good news is that over the past 20 years the amount of contaminated trash created at nuke plants has dropped significantly through better planning, the reuse of materials/tools etc. in contaminated areas. The source of high level waste is spent fuel. Sites have spent fuel storage pools, but they are fast filling up (due to operating license extentions). Dry cask storage, an above ground shielded storage 'pod', allows for safe on-site storage of spent fuel and is a system used at many sites already. Dry cask storage has created a public uproar at some sites that could potentially cause a plant to shutdown prior to the end of its licensing.

Many people argue that wind and solar are "green" energy sources while nuke power, because of the waste and potential of contamination, should not be considered 'green'.  What these arguements don't consider is the climate damage created in the manufacture of items such as fiberglass for fan blades of a wind farm, or manufacture of the panels for solar collectors. Yes, the concrete and steel used in the manufacture of a nuke plant adds a size or two to the ol' carbon foot print too, but unlike wind and solar farms, the concrete structures of a nuke plant do not need to be routinely replaced.

Finally, ground has been broken in the U.S. for a new nuke plant @ the Vogtle site in Georgia. The hope is for the new unit (one of 7 planned in the US) to be on the grid by 2017...and one last thing, nuclear power plants are not run by baffoons as depicted in movies like 'China System', or  (UGH!) the made for TV abomination 'Atomic Twister'.

laozilover

laozilover Avatar

Location: K Town (Kenosha, Wisconsin)
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 8, 2009 - 4:15am

The discussion so far seems pretty reasonable.  Is this RP??? I read Beaker's link and the Wikipedia article on the IFR. Looks like the IFR wins on points. Nice to see both PEAK OIL and Global Warming taken seriously, even tacitly.

Thanks for the topic, Beaker.
{#Clap}


NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 7, 2009 - 9:33pm

 miamizsun wrote:
Savior.

We'll need it.

Does anyone know anything about this:

Prescription For The Planet

here's some video:


 
far out.. they are pretty amazing claims! Here's the wiki entry on it.

I remember the fast breeder project getting cancelled in Germany in the nineties although I do seem to remember that a lot of the reservations were technical rather than political.

Still, I'm with James Lovelock, I think it is high-time we put nuclear power back on the agenda. It is certainly not the only solution and I would love investment in "cleaner" technologies to mushroom, like that osmosis power plant Hazzeswede posted a link to, and solar, but time is running out and we have to get away from fossil fuels and the faster the better.

Unfortunately, Lazy is also right when he describes the Luddites behind the anti-nuclear movement back in the day. I remember it well. Very very few in the movement actually knew what they were talking about and 3 mile island and Chernobyl sealed the fate of the entire industry in the public's eye. A great shame because it has cost us a good 20 years of pursuing technologies like this.

If the claims are true (99.5% efficiency, use of spent fuel from water-cooled reactors, nuclear waste with a half-life of 200 years, enough fuel already there (i.e. no new mining) for a thousand or more years), then we don't need to wait for fusion... or at the least it will give us another 1000 years development time..
Sounds pretty good to me!

miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 7, 2009 - 8:37pm

Savior.

We'll need it.

Does anyone know anything about this:

Prescription For The Planet

here's some video:



islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 7, 2009 - 5:39pm

 dionysius wrote:


I just want a bigger effort made towards fusion (with solar, geothermal and wind energy utilized as stopgaps until such time as it is feasible). Then we can abandon the poisonous carbon and fission technologies altogether.

 
okay, and reasonable. But given the demand, and the increase in demand between now and when when fusion becomes viable, how do we support the increased system load? Solar, wind, geothermal, tidal ect. will help, but even with support that they are not likely to get near term they are only pieces of the whole solution, that also include conservation and systemic shifts in usage.  That really leaves fission and fossil as the only proven things on the table that can scale to meet the demands. I"m all for the experimental too, but we need a plan B (or really a plan A while we hope one of the experiments pans out). And since we know that fossil just exacerbates the problems... well, that leaves nuclear - which is pretty well proven and would probably be saving our bacon already had we not had such high profile problems as 3 mile island and Chernobyl.

Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 22, 23, 24  Next