Nuclear Energy?

Recommended Videos

Muspelheim

New member
Apr 7, 2011
2,021
0
0
Also, the issue of the warm plantwater being dumped into the surrounding sea or rivers could be very simply solved if we recycled that water and used it for heating elsewhere. While that might sound dangerous on paper, it's worth to remember that the particular water being dumped haven't been anywhere near the reactor core. It's the water that was used in the steam turbines, and it's just as safe as any old water in the area. A hypothetical accident would have to be pretty flippin' odd in order to irradiate that particular water circuit.
 

DoomyMcDoom

New member
Jul 4, 2008
1,410
0
0
I say fuck nuclear, let's start building Geothermal plants, they have even less risk than nuclear, they cannot be sabbotaged in a way that is dangerous to the surrounding environment, AND they produce a ton of electricity, and have an insanely low opperating cost... Look into it, you'll see what I mean, there's a ton of oppertunity all over the place to build em and the "hotspots" they'd be sittin on are good for thousands more years of electricity production, and well yeah, no fuel materials, no harmful emissions AT ALL!
 

Naeras

New member
Mar 1, 2011
989
0
0
There is really only two downsides to nuclear power: it's not renewable, and it results in radioactive waste.
No, "but what if it explodes" isn't as big of a question. You remember Japan last year? The radiation level in the city in question was still lower than what it currently is in the city I'm in now(Oslo). Chernobyl isn't going to repeat itself, either, as security on those reactors are far, far better than what it was back then, and that level of human error isn't going to happen again.

But yeah. The only real downside is nuclear waste, a problem that would be a lot smaller if other types of fission reactors(thorium in particular) were viable. On the other hand, that really is a serious downside that we don't really know how to address. I still don't think the cons outweigh the pros, however: it's a very effective energy source and doesn't release greenhouse gases.
 

gim73

New member
Jul 17, 2008
526
0
0
Huh? What? Somebody wants to know about nuclear power? Somebody wants to know about an industry that is so heavily regulated that shipping casks have to be dropped large distances onto a metal spike without being punctured, set on fire, submerged under the water and various other tests before being able to be used? Okay.

Might as well start with radiation leaking out of the plants. Radiation can't really be 'leaked' out. While some material can be 'leaked' out, that is all carefully monitered to prevent such an occurance. Plants are designed so that by the time you get to the outer fence of the plant, your radiation moniter should read background.

As far as fusion power goes: Imagine this, you have a tiny sun. What material can you build around it to contain it? How do you stop it from getting hotter or cool it down? What material is able to transfer this thermal output into electricity in an efficient and consistant manner? Now cold fusion is the dream, but I have my doubts on being able to attain a critical level.
 

direkiller

New member
Dec 4, 2008
1,655
0
0
Antari said:
That won't always be so, they are pretty rapidly improving the power requirements to create hydrogen in large amounts. The progress will put Nuclear energy into the history books in time.
if your talking about hydrogen that powers cars:
you are still breaking the hydrogen off of water?
if so there's a law of physics you need to break to get a net gain of energy
and that's not gona happen.

If your talking about Fusion:
We still have a while to go. Where not even to the point where were getting a positive amount of useful energy let alone a working power plant.
 
Mar 5, 2011
690
0
0
I love nuclear power. Did you know that there is enough thorium in the U.S. alone to power the whole country for 1000 years? Also switching to nuclear power means no more shitty energy star appliances. :D

EDIT: One more fact: The Fukushima Reactor was scheduled to be shutdown and was at the end of it's lifespan.
 
Mar 5, 2011
690
0
0
flare100 said:
Im completely against it. I don't care how safe some people make it out to be. Accidents can and do happen. The switch from fossil to nuclear is simply trading off one set of problems for another. Keep it out of my country.
You are completely wrong. If knew took off your blinders and looked at the facts then you wouldn't if they built a hundred nuclear plant in where ever you live.