Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 76

Thread: The People of Vermont vs. Nuclear Power

  1. #31
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: The People of Vermont vs. Nuclear Power

    [QUOTE=DaveFagan;1059418386]
    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill;Speaking in absolutes is for absolute idiots.

    Education is expensive, ignorance is costly.

    Each generation should have more opportunities than the last, but not at the expense of the next.QUOTE

    Hypocrisy is cheap, eh?
    not in any way a post related to the OP, purely a personal attack.

    want to read some rules?

    but since you are here, want to splain yourself, Lucy?
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  2. #32
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: The People of Vermont vs. Nuclear Power

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Yeah, and people can be rather unreasonable when it comes to "radiation". People will freak out and not understand the overall probabilities. Nuclear power is one of the safest and cleanest forms of energy we currently have. We shouldn't be afraid of it and it can be very useful as we continue to investigate and develope other energy sources.
    Irradiated foods are a useful side benefit of nuclear energy...
    A friend told me yesterday that she doesn't want any radioactive foods, tried to explain it to her, but her mind was made up.
    Guess she will forego being outside without her lead lined hat, having xrays, sleeping next to a human, etc.
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  3. #33
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:39 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,290

    Re: The People of Vermont vs. Nuclear Power

    [QUOTE=UtahBill;1059418523]
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post

    not in any way a post related to the OP, purely a personal attack.

    want to read some rules?

    but since you are here, want to splain yourself, Lucy?
    "Each generation should have more opportunities than the last, but not at the expense of the next."

    When you leave radioactive waste with a thousands of years half lifes, you are absolutely expensing the future. It is your quote and in absolute opposition to you nuke statements. That would be hypocrisy, nothing personal at all. Just a fact. Duly noted.

  4. #34
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: The People of Vermont vs. Nuclear Power

    [QUOTE=DaveFagan;1059419286]
    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    "Each generation should have more opportunities than the last, but not at the expense of the next."

    When you leave radioactive waste with a thousands of years half lifes, you are absolutely expensing the future. It is your quote and in absolute opposition to you nuke statements. That would be hypocrisy, nothing personal at all. Just a fact. Duly noted.
    that quote is about education. it is stupid to extrapolate it to nuclear waste....it means you got nothing concrete to say about the topic, so you just get personal and go for the sig...
    Name ONE event where people were harmed by the nuclear waste from commercial power plants in the USA......if you can.
    Spent nuclear fuel is easily contained even if at great expense, and only a large well armed team of fanatics with a death wish would attempt to steal any of it. They wouldn't survive.
    They would do far better stealing land mines, installed land mines, by walking around with iron weights strapped to their boots, blindfolded.
    We have non-nuclear wastes generated that DO cause problems. Leaking landfills, tons of waste coal ash spilling into rivers, waste products from the production of solar cells, etc. A lot of electronics waste gets shipped to very poor countries for them to deal with. Their countries get polluted, their people get poisoned. At least nuclear waste is stored at home and not shipped off to poison the environments of poor countries...
    However, I am in favor of not building nukes, or coal, or even Combined cycle gas turbine plants, as well as solar and wind.
    If we were to stop erecting pisspoor structures, we could soon shut down a substantial percentage of our dirtiest coal plants.
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  5. #35
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: The People of Vermont vs. Nuclear Power

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post

    When you leave radioactive waste with a thousands of years half lifes, you are absolutely expensing the future. It is your quote and in absolute opposition to you nuke statements. That would be hypocrisy, nothing personal at all. Just a fact. Duly noted.
    Ignoring my point that waste can be dealt in a variety of ways doesn't help you. It makes you look incredibly weak. I suggest you not follow the tactics of cowardly users here who ignore whatever they cannot refute.

    France generates most of its power from Nuclear with a suprisingly small amount of waste because it constantly reprocesses. Couple that with Thorium Eater reactors and waste becomes a thing of the past.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  6. #36
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: The People of Vermont vs. Nuclear Power

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Ignoring my point that waste can be dealt in a variety of ways doesn't help you. It makes you look incredibly weak. I suggest you not follow the tactics of cowardly users here who ignore whatever they cannot refute.

    France generates most of its power from Nuclear with a suprisingly small amount of waste because it constantly reprocesses. Couple that with Thorium Eater reactors and waste becomes a thing of the past.
    oh, the shame, the FRENCH are ahead of us!!!
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  7. #37
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:39 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,290

    Re: The People of Vermont vs. Nuclear Power

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    oh, the shame, the FRENCH are ahead of us!!!
    Oh yeh! Like all others, they are pretending that they are a responsible agent to take care of a waste product for thousands of generations. These are Corporations giving these assurances. I do not believe anyone should be allowed to give any assurances beyond their own generation. When Corporations no longer make profit from nukes, then bankruptcy follows and the waste are somebody else's problem. That would be a human problem, no longer a Corporate problem. I know, I know, you can absolutely assure me that this waste is manageable for thousands of generations. Sheesh, talk about pie in the sky. It is hypocrisy, clearly.

  8. #38
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: The People of Vermont vs. Nuclear Power

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    Oh yeh! Like all others, they are pretending that they are a responsible agent to take care of a waste product for thousands of generations. These are Corporations giving these assurances. I do not believe anyone should be allowed to give any assurances beyond their own generation. When Corporations no longer make profit from nukes, then bankruptcy follows and the waste are somebody else's problem. That would be a human problem, no longer a Corporate problem. I know, I know, you can absolutely assure me that this waste is manageable for thousands of generations. Sheesh, talk about pie in the sky. It is hypocrisy, clearly.
    The French don't want to freeze in the dark, how stupid of them. They should go totally solar and wind, and freeze in the dark when the sun don't shine and the wind don't blow.
    I suppose you can make that suggestion to THEM...
    What is French for "piss off, yank"......
    (not to mention chinese and korean, they are putting in new nukes)

    again, we could probably conserve our way out of this mess. it might take 30 years of new construction done right, plus retrofitting older buildings, but it beats burning more coal and storing more nuclear waste.

    What is your take on dumping spent fuel in the deeper parts of the ocean?
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  9. #39
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:39 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,290

    Re: The People of Vermont vs. Nuclear Power

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    The French don't want to freeze in the dark, how stupid of them. They should go totally solar and wind, and freeze in the dark when the sun don't shine and the wind don't blow.
    I suppose you can make that suggestion to THEM...
    What is French for "piss off, yank"......
    (not to mention chinese and korean, they are putting in new nukes)

    again, we could probably conserve our way out of this mess. it might take 30 years of new construction done right, plus retrofitting older buildings, but it beats burning more coal and storing more nuclear waste.

    What is your take on dumping spent fuel in the deeper parts of the ocean?
    I don't logically envision any safe place for nuclear waste. I remember about 1954-5 and General Electric was promoting nuclear power and stating on television or any other media venue that they had access to , that scientists expected to be able to perfect technology to neutralize the waste within six months. That question was asked to our class of eighth graders "what we thought of this nuclear waste problem/" It was a consensus and nearly unanimous conclusion that GE should wait the six months for the solution before implementing the technology. Of course, the reality is/was that GE knew there was no short term solution for this waste and sold us, as a Nation, a bill of goods. We have the waste we have, stop producing it. I do not envision the oceans having a limitless ability to dilute poisons. That water is as critical to aquatic lifeforms as air is to our lifeform. Hubris, greed, arrogance, ignorance, carelessness, shortsightedness, and any number of non-virtuous character traits are the driving force behind this technology. Technological sophistication without mental and ethical sophistication is a formula for catastrophe. You asked what I thought! Now you know.

  10. #40
    Verifier
    Gladiator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Your Back Yard
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,877

    Re: The People of Vermont vs. Nuclear Power

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    It may be an exaggeration, you can research it if you like, but as a former nuke operator myself, it is true.
    Coal is not pure, it contains lots of radioactive components in small quantities, and when the coal gets burned and the waste goes out the stack, the radioactive stuff goes out as well, along with sulphur, mercury, etc.
    Clean Coal does NOT exist....cleaner burning coal fired plants, yes, but there is no such thing as CLEAN when coal is the source, only a bit cleanER...
    90% less carbon is MUCH cleaner. Mercury and sulfer are easy to scrub.

    "Bow City has been designed from the outset to have the smallest feasible carbon footprint, using super-critical combustion technology to generate the lowest level of CO2 emissions per unit of power of any coal-fired power plant in Canada.


    The project is continuing with plans to incorporate an amine scrubbing system capable of removing up to 90% of the project's CO2 emissions.


    This will move Bow City's carbon emissions well below the requirements being proposed by government and make it Canada's first true "clean coal" power project, said BCPL.


    The scrubbed CO2 is proposed to be permanently disposed of into nearby oil fields for enhanced oil recovery..."






    Bow City Power Project continues with CCS plans - Carbon Capture Journal


    http://www.carboncapturejournal.com/...php?NewsID=253


    High Efficiency super critical boiler have increased efficiency, with special tube metals for increased heat transfer efficiency.



    http://environment.alberta.ca/documents/Luscar_PDD.pdf
    Last edited by Gladiator; 04-19-11 at 08:33 PM.
    _______________________________
    How did Our Oil get under Their Sand?

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... 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
  •