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

Bug Reports & Feature Requests - BillG - Jul 16, 2019 - 1:48pm
 
Name My Band - black321 - Jul 16, 2019 - 1:44pm
 
Radio Paradise Comments - BlueHeronDruid - Jul 16, 2019 - 12:53pm
 
Coffee - sunybuny - Jul 16, 2019 - 11:46am
 
New Music - R_P - Jul 16, 2019 - 11:05am
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 16, 2019 - 10:41am
 
TED Talks - Proclivities - Jul 16, 2019 - 9:58am
 
Counting with Pictures - ScottN - Jul 16, 2019 - 9:58am
 
What Makes You Sad? - oldviolin - Jul 16, 2019 - 9:32am
 
Best guitarists - oldviolin - Jul 16, 2019 - 9:25am
 
Lyrics That Remind You of Someone - oldviolin - Jul 16, 2019 - 9:08am
 
MusicBee -- music client - westslope - Jul 16, 2019 - 8:19am
 
Trump - westslope - Jul 16, 2019 - 7:53am
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 16, 2019 - 7:07am
 
What Makes You Laugh? - Egctheow - Jul 16, 2019 - 5:57am
 
Books - sirdroseph - Jul 16, 2019 - 5:34am
 
Baseball, anyone? - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 15, 2019 - 10:05pm
 
Posting pictures - haresfur - Jul 15, 2019 - 4:18pm
 
Fix My Car - SeriousLee - Jul 15, 2019 - 3:03pm
 
Plugin RP for Volumio - dpozzi - Jul 15, 2019 - 1:14pm
 
FLAC Streaming - dpozzi - Jul 15, 2019 - 1:13pm
 
The Dog House - westslope - Jul 15, 2019 - 10:10am
 
Vinyl for old timer - Copenhagen_Cat - Jul 15, 2019 - 9:11am
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - oldviolin - Jul 15, 2019 - 8:21am
 
Things You Thought Today - oldviolin - Jul 15, 2019 - 8:14am
 
UK stream - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 15, 2019 - 7:21am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - ColdMiser - Jul 15, 2019 - 4:04am
 
Immigration - haresfur - Jul 14, 2019 - 10:52pm
 
What are you listening to now? - SeriousLee - Jul 14, 2019 - 11:25am
 
Climate Change - miamizsun - Jul 14, 2019 - 11:15am
 
Democratic Party - westslope - Jul 14, 2019 - 9:24am
 
• • • Clownstock • • •  - SeriousLee - Jul 14, 2019 - 6:27am
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Jul 13, 2019 - 10:33pm
 
Pence - R_P - Jul 13, 2019 - 5:56pm
 
• • •  What's For Dinner ? • • •  - oldviolin - Jul 13, 2019 - 4:42pm
 
Nuclear power - saviour or scourge? - miamizsun - Jul 13, 2019 - 2:52pm
 
You might be getting old if...... - Egctheow - Jul 13, 2019 - 2:01pm
 
Protest Songs - rhahl - Jul 13, 2019 - 12:02pm
 
Those Lovable Policemen - R_P - Jul 13, 2019 - 11:50am
 
Are they married yet? YES THEY ARE! - SeriousLee - Jul 13, 2019 - 11:34am
 
Cryptic Posts - Leave Them Guessing - oldviolin - Jul 13, 2019 - 11:24am
 
When Yesterday's Over - Copenhagen_Cat - Jul 13, 2019 - 4:54am
 
David Gilmour's guitars on auction last month - Copenhagen_Cat - Jul 13, 2019 - 3:03am
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - black321 - Jul 12, 2019 - 11:21am
 
FLAC stream - redwoodcat - Jul 12, 2019 - 10:33am
 
Once upon a time... - Proclivities - Jul 12, 2019 - 8:19am
 
Today in History - islander - Jul 12, 2019 - 6:31am
 
The Groovy Mix - Coaxial - Jul 11, 2019 - 7:03pm
 
Bear! - Coaxial - Jul 11, 2019 - 6:54pm
 
RP Windows Desktop Notification Applet - BillG - Jul 11, 2019 - 4:33pm
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Jul 11, 2019 - 3:41pm
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - oldviolin - Jul 11, 2019 - 3:30pm
 
Football, soccer, futbol, calcio... - black321 - Jul 11, 2019 - 2:16pm
 
Things that piss me off - Copenhagen_Cat - Jul 11, 2019 - 1:37pm
 
Tech & Science - R_P - Jul 11, 2019 - 11:57am
 
Dancing Bananas !!! - Proclivities - Jul 11, 2019 - 11:19am
 
Great album covers - Copenhagen_Cat - Jul 11, 2019 - 10:17am
 
Derplahoma Questions and Points of Interest - Red_Dragon - Jul 11, 2019 - 9:43am
 
Republican Wingnut Freak of the Day - Red_Dragon - Jul 11, 2019 - 7:33am
 
What music does your cat/dog like - or hate? - Copenhagen_Cat - Jul 11, 2019 - 3:19am
 
Gardeners Corner - Steely_D - Jul 10, 2019 - 8:44pm
 
Music Videos - anders_s - Jul 10, 2019 - 3:34pm
 
Fox Spews - R_P - Jul 10, 2019 - 1:50pm
 
People Whose Names Make You Snort - Copenhagen_Cat - Jul 10, 2019 - 1:11pm
 
More reggae, less Marley please - R_P - Jul 10, 2019 - 11:18am
 
Canada - R_P - Jul 10, 2019 - 11:11am
 
Turntables - miamizsun - Jul 10, 2019 - 10:36am
 
Privacy over the internet - westslope - Jul 10, 2019 - 10:29am
 
Podcast recommendations??? - miamizsun - Jul 10, 2019 - 10:05am
 
Rock Movies/Documentaries - black321 - Jul 10, 2019 - 10:04am
 
Words that should be put on the substitutes bench for a year - miamizsun - Jul 10, 2019 - 9:43am
 
Annoying stuff. not things that piss you off, just annoyi... - mrtuba9 - Jul 10, 2019 - 7:19am
 
(Big) Media Watch - black321 - Jul 10, 2019 - 7:16am
 
What Are You Going To Do Today? - GeneP59 - Jul 9, 2019 - 6:21pm
 
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see - Steely_D - Jul 9, 2019 - 3:44pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Nuclear power - saviour or scourge? Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 21, 22, 23  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 ... , 21, 22, 23  Next