Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: Republicans push nuclear energy to lower costs

  1. #1
    Dispenser of Negativity
    Cold Highway's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Newburgh, New York and World 8: Dark Land
    Last Seen
    12-24-12 @ 11:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    9,596
    Blog Entries
    7

    Republicans push nuclear energy to lower costs

    Finally some sense in our energy policy but of course this would hinge on how many Blue Dogs and Centrist Democrats they can get on board.

    Republicans push nuclear energy to lower costs
    Jackboots always come in matched pairs, a left boot and a right boot.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Last Seen
    08-29-17 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    16,575

    Re: Republicans push nuclear energy to lower costs

    The problem with nuclear power is not a liberal/conservative one, but a "I don't want it in my backyard problem".

    All sides have some opposition to nuclear power as well as where to store the waste. And I don't see the problem getting any better at the very least until the many Yucca Mountain decisions are made final and there is some data once the moving of waste has happened for a few years.

    Me personally, I wouldn't have any problem with a nuclear reactor near me. The safety protocols have been upgraded considerably over the last decade and the jobs it would create would be greatly needed.

  3. #3
    Professor
    WillRockwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    07-10-10 @ 09:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,950

    Re: Republicans push nuclear energy to lower costs

    Nuclear power is a wonderful source of cheap energy....if nothing goes wrong. If it does you have Chernobyl, an area the size of Maryland which cannot be entered for 10,000 years. Can you guarantee that will not happen?

  4. #4
    Conservative Independent
    DarkWizard12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Tyler TX
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 07:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,555

    Re: Republicans push nuclear energy to lower costs

    Quote Originally Posted by WillRockwell View Post
    Nuclear power is a wonderful source of cheap energy....if nothing goes wrong. If it does you have Chernobyl, an area the size of Maryland which cannot be entered for 10,000 years. Can you guarantee that will not happen?
    I think Utah Bill could shed some light on that. One of the few issues I actually agree with him on.

    *waits*.

  5. #5
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Republicans push nuclear energy to lower costs

    Quote Originally Posted by WillRockwell View Post
    Nuclear power is a wonderful source of cheap energy....if nothing goes wrong. If it does you have Chernobyl, an area the size of Maryland which cannot be entered for 10,000 years. Can you guarantee that will not happen?
    Yes, with 100% certainty, I can guarantee that no US Nuclear Power Station would ever suffer a Chernobyl like disaster. It's an impossibility.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  6. #6
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Republicans push nuclear energy to lower costs

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    Yes, with 100% certainty, I can guarantee that no US Nuclear Power Station would ever suffer a Chernobyl like disaster. It's an impossibility.
    Three Mile Island got pretty close. Closer than you m might think

  7. #7
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Republicans push nuclear energy to lower costs

    GHOST TOWN - KiddofSpeed - Chernobyl Pictures - Kidofspeed - Elena

    THIS site, I recommend to EVERYONE, it is one of the best damn real life reads in the world.

    [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster]Chernobyl disaster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

    A good read on the events, while it IS Wiki, it covers most of it.

    A Chernobyl type event could happen at any nuclear power station.

    No it could not. There are several specific design flaws in the RBMK that allowed this disaster to happen. These design flaws are not present in Western reactors and certainly not in Generation III+ reactors. First it is important to recognise the conditions under which the power surge occurred.
    To summarise, the Chernobyl-4 disaster happened because of five major design flaws not present in Western reactors.

    -=-=-

    The uranium-graphite-water type is inherently unstable and this was known since the early 50s, which is why since then such a reactor would never have been certified in the West. The misoperation of the reactor allowing xenon-135 to build up only enhanced this failing.
    The automatic shutdown system could be overridden by the operators. This cannot be done in Western designs. If the reactor wants to scram, nobody will be able to stop it. After all, a reactor scramming without reason is an inconvenience. A reactor prevented from scramming when necessary is a litigation nightmare.
    The control rods could be physically retracted further than regulations allow. In Western reactors, control rods will only be able to be withdrawn as far as deemed safe. They cannot be physically withdrawn further.
    The control rods were tipped with graphite, which leads to an increase in reactivity upon first insertion, quite the opposite of what you want if the reactor is scramming.
    The RBMK design lacked proper containment, which allowed the radioactive material to escape into the environment.
    Freedom For Fission- chernobyl
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  8. #8
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Republicans push nuclear energy to lower costs

    Mr. V for the record I'm very pro nuke energy. And ithink we should look at the technology France has devolped.

  9. #9
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Republicans push nuclear energy to lower costs

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Three Mile Island got pretty close. Closer than you m might think
    NOT EVEN close, three mile Island was proof our systems are safe. No one even DIED from the TMI event.

    Thirty years ago this week, a chain of errors and equipment malfunctions triggered the defining event in the history of American nuclear power: the accident at Three Mile Island. Although no one died and the health consequences were insignificant, the mishap was vivid confirmation that things could go wrong with a nuclear reactor. It almost instantly galvanized popular opposition to this form of power, giving rise to lingering misconceptions about one of our nation's largest sources of electricity. 1. Three Mile Island killed the idea of nuclear power

    in the United States.

    The 1979 accident and the fear it spawned were undoubtedly setbacks to the nuclear power industry. Only recently did utilities even attempt to license new reactors again. But Three Mile Island didn't even kill nuclear power at Three Mile Island. While TMI 2 was destroyed, TMI 1 is still in operation today. In fact, in generating electricity, nuclear power is second only to coal, which produces about half the power we use. Nuclear today produces more electricity than it did at the time of the accident -- about 20 percent compared with 12.5 percent in 1979. 2. Long half-lives make radioactive materials dangerous.
    5 Myths on Nuclear Power - washingtonpost.com

    Three Mile Island: What Happened

    On March 28, 1979, a cooling circuit pump in the non-nuclear section of Three Mile Island's second station (TMI-2) malfunctioned, causing the reactor's primary coolant to heat and internal pressure to rise. Within seconds, the automated response mechanism thrust control rods into the reactor and shut down the core. An escape valve opened to release pressure but failed to close properly. Control room operators only saw that a "close" command was sent to the relief valve, but nothing displayed the valve's actual position.[1] With the valve open, coolant escaped through the pressurizer, sending misinformation to operators that there was too much pressure in the coolant system. Operators then shut down the water pumps to relieve the "pressure."

    Operators allowed coolant levels inside the reactor to fall, leaving the uranium core exposed, dry, and intensely hot. Even though inserting control rods halted the fission process, the TMI-2 reactor core continued to generate about 160 megawatts of "decay" heat, declining over the next three hours to 20 megawatts.[2] Approximately one-third of the TMI-2 reactor was exposed and began to melt.

    By the time operators discovered what was happening, superheated and partially radioactive steam built up in auxiliary tanks, which operators then moved to waste tanks through compressors and pipes. The compressors leaked. The steam leakage released a radiation dose equivalent to that of a chest X-ray scan, about one-third of the radiation humans absorb in one year from naturally occurring background radiation.[3] No damage to any person, animal, or plant was ever found.[4]
    Three Mile Island and Chernobyl: What Went Wrong and Why Today's Reactors Are Safe

    However, if you hit the tinfoil hat sites like "commondreams" and other looney sites you can read how "scary" TMI was and how "Much radiation leaked EVERYWHERE" .

    Yeah, no. TMI was a minor radiation event, that the media blew out of proportion. Instead of saying "Hey, the reactor had a partial meltdown, some systems failed and errors were made, but look! The safety system worked!" They played the "RADIATION!!! MINDS DECAY!! ELECTRIC FUNERAL PYRE!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!"
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  10. #10
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: Republicans push nuclear energy to lower costs

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Mr. V for the record I'm very pro nuke energy. And ithink we should look at the technology France has devolped.
    Good! I just like to tackle the nuclear issue, it's something I enjoy reading about in my spare time.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •