Like the illusion of Wall Street, with its vast and powerful investment banks, now shuttered, China too is an illusion perpetuated by the Globalists that gave us the 15,000 mile Caesar salad, poisoned cat food and lead based paint on babies' pacifiers. Like the illusion that money would come from thin air to always push housing prices higher, China has spent a generation pursuing its illusion. Pursuing an unattainable dream to be like the West, while 6000 years of its carefully shepherded top soil blows into the sea.
Joined: Apr 09, 2007 Posts: 6343 Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 8:34 pm Post subject: Building nukes to save the environment
Texas is building 8 new nuclear power plants. Over a hundred new
nuclear power plants are being built around the world right now. Nukes do not produce CO2 and some environmentalists now support building nukes as a way to reduce carbon emissions and stop Greenhouse Warming.
The new Bali treaty calls for reductions in CO2 production. Replacing primitive coal-fired power plants and their damaging CO2 emissions with nuclear power plants will help accomplish this. _________________ "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." -- George Orwell
Joined: Apr 09, 2007 Posts: 6343 Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:42 pm Post subject: Re: Building nukes to save the environment
One hundred years from we'll be saying we should have built nukes to generate electricity instead of coal-fired power plants, because Greenhouse Warming was even worse then the scientists suggested it would be
Joined: Mar 26, 2005 Posts: 3902 Location: over here
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:37 pm Post subject: Re: Building nukes to save the environment
I think more and more environmentalists have come to accept nuclear as the lesser of two evils these days. I think it would've been unthinkable 20 years ago in those circles, but then again it's a much bigger and broader movement now that is more willing to accept practicle compromises.
Joined: Aug 27, 2004 Posts: 163 Location: missouri
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:49 pm Post subject: Re: Building nukes to save the environment
And once again, I must ask: what will they do with the waste? And what will they say about that in 100, 200, 500, or 10,000 years, should we get so lucky?
Joined: Apr 09, 2007 Posts: 6343 Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 12:13 am Post subject: Re: Building nukes to save the environment
stepka wrote:
And once again, I must ask: what will they do with the waste? And what will they say about that in 100, 200, 500, or 10,000 years, should we get so lucky?
Good question. The US federal government has tried for 30 years and simply hasn't been able to come up with a viable plan that would satisfy all the political and environmental obstacles (although other countries like France and Sweden do have waste disposal plans.)
Here's a question for you. What will we do with all the extra ocean water submerging the world's coastlines and drowning places like Venice, the Netherlands, New Orleans, Bangladesh, etc. if we keep burning coal and other hydrocarbons and sea level keeps rising?
Joined: Oct 18, 2004 Posts: 2124 Location: kiwibush
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:23 am Post subject: Re: Building nukes to save the environment
The problem is this growth paradigm we labour under. For that, we are prepared to add further unaudited risks to an already overburdened environment simply because the vast bulk of us will not be around to address the issues this may give rise to whilst ensuring that our selfish way of life persists. Never mind, as a species we're pretty unspectacular I'm sure, in the grand scheme of things. _________________ Bugger me, I hear oil's runnin out mate!
Joined: Apr 06, 2006 Posts: 3625 Location: 3 miles NW of Champoeg, Republic of Cascadia
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:14 am Post subject: Re: Building nukes to save the environment
Helen Caldicott must be in a froth!
stepka wrote:
And once again, I must ask: what will they do with the waste? And what will they say about that in 100, 200, 500, or 10,000 years, should we get so lucky?
We can pile it up on Lovelock's yard!
Sweden and Norway have good waste disposal programs - right, Starvid?
Here's hoping they build some reactors and burners to transmute the worst of it. Read some really novel proposals on dealing with waste/proliferation - like sealing it in glass balls and dumping them into ocean trenches. Good luck with your submersible, Mr. Terror.
And of course there are Gen IV designs that are passively safe and fully contained, produce hydrogen on the side, etc. Those are tomorrow's reactors, though.
Joined: Apr 28, 2005 Posts: 3908 Location: West shore Lake Eire, MI, USA
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 5:16 am Post subject: Re: Building nukes to save the environment
Plantagenet wrote:
stepka wrote:
And once again, I must ask: what will they do with the waste? And what will they say about that in 100, 200, 500, or 10,000 years, should we get so lucky?
Good question. The US federal government has tried for 30 years and simply hasn't been able to come up with a viable plan that would satisfy all the political and environmental obstacles (although other countries like France and Sweden do have waste disposal plans.)
All of the problems are purely Pollitical, not environmental. Because of its low volume spent Uranium can be stored easily in easy to secure locations, however this has not been 'pollitically viable' for two generations due to opposition from groups who run on fear instead of logic. _________________ Always appeal to a man's enlightened self interest, you can trust him to look out for himself honestly, It's when you appeal to his Honor or the Common Good that he stops paying attention.
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:52 am Post subject: Re: Building nukes to save the environment
Again, I will chip in. The nuclear waste problems are not merely political. That is unless you disregard the opposing view to the energy establishment of the effects of low-level radiation, especially internal on biological organisms. That debate is far from settled and each side will not budge.
Coal does have uranium etc. but coal does not produce radioactive strontium, caesium, plutonium, nitrogen, etc. etc. a whole host of which have a nasty habit of easily bioaccumulating and causing damage orders of magnitude worse than if the same dose were external. In fact, the uranium in coal is partly responsible for its deleterious effects on health.
Now, given that we have other ways to spin a wheel, that can scale to the same level what's the point other than to maintain the military-industrial link? I mean Texas needing nuclear. Give me a break!!! Drive out to the desert of West Texas one day and tell me why nuclear is necessary? Funny enough, I could understand if Germany felt that way given their poor renewable resource but the U.S? Canada? Australia? _________________ For ionizing radiation “…the human epidemiological evidence establishes—by any reasonable standard of proof—that there is no safe dose or dose-rate…the safe-dose hypothesis is not merely implausible—it is disproven.” Dr. J.W. Gofman 4
Joined: Apr 27, 2007 Posts: 4351 Location: The Great Sonoran Desert
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:09 am Post subject: Re: Building nukes to save the environment
Andy wrote:
Again, I will chip in. The nuclear waste problems are not merely political. That is unless you disregard the opposing view to the energy establishment of the effects of low-level radiation, especially internal on biological organisms. That debate is far from settled and each side will not budge.
Coal does have uranium etc. but coal does not produce radioactive strontium, caesium, plutonium, nitrogen, etc. etc. a whole host of which have a nasty habit of easily bioaccumulating and causing damage orders of magnitude worse than if the same dose were external. In fact, the uranium in coal is partly responsible for its deleterious effects on health.
Now, given that we have other ways to spin a wheel, that can scale to the same level what's the point other than to maintain the military-industrial link? I mean Texas needing nuclear. Give me a break!!! Drive out to the desert of West Texas one day and tell me why nuclear is necessary? Funny enough, I could understand if Germany felt that way given their poor renewable resource but the U.S? Canada? Australia?
Well said Andy!
I would also mention that ERCOT (texas grid) is not connected to any of the other surrounding domestic grids like the WECC (western grid)...
Why nukes in Texas if not connected to other grids to wheel this additional capacity? I do not know the answer to that. _________________ "There must be a bogeyman; there always is, and it cannot be something as esoteric as "resource depletion." You can't go to war with that." Emersonbiggins
"... hope is a rotten-thighed whore" Niko Kazantzakis
We are going back to roccland - me
Last edited by roccman on Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:13 am; edited 2 times in total
Joined: Apr 27, 2007 Posts: 4351 Location: The Great Sonoran Desert
Posted: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:11 am Post subject: Re: Building nukes to save the environment
Unless that additional power is to go to mexico which the ERCOT grid is connected to.
Would fit nicely into the NAU. _________________ "There must be a bogeyman; there always is, and it cannot be something as esoteric as "resource depletion." You can't go to war with that." Emersonbiggins
"... hope is a rotten-thighed whore" Niko Kazantzakis
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:35 pm Post subject: Re: Building nukes to save the environment
And of course we should always encourage, facilitate, and accommodate population growth.
Andy, AD, and roccman have it right on this one. Money spent on nukes will not be spent on conservation and renewables. And it will take tons and tons of cash to build these monsters. That's why so many in the industry are salivating so profusely.
But wait. Our President, George W. Bush, has just addressed the nation and spoken strongly about how important it is to turn to nuclear power. He's been so right about everything else he's done, he must be right about this too! I'm convinced!
Let's build thousands of glowing nuke plants. There is simply no chance that our wonderfully competent government will make any monumental disastrous mistakes in mining, transporting, processing, or disposing of any of this enormously toxic stuff. No way! After all, they did a "heck of a job" with Katrina, our President said so.
-------------------
Giving up coal for nukes is like giving up cigarettes for a crack cocaine habit.
Joined: Sep 24, 2007 Posts: 2584 Location: third from the sun
Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2007 12:40 am Post subject: Re: Building nukes to save the environment
dohboi wrote:
There is simply no chance that our wonderfully competent government will make any monumental disastrous mistakes in mining, transporting, processing, or disposing of any of this enormously toxic stuff. No way! After all, they did a "heck of a job" with Katrina, our President said so.
Hmm, maybe they'll hire the Saudis to secure them.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
