• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would You Tolerate Nuclear Power For Energy Independence?

Are You Interested In More Nuclear Power?


  • Total voters
    101
I'm no scientist, but I doubt many of us live far enough away from an existing nuclear power plant not to be radiated if it melted.

The US apparently recommended a 50 mile evacuation zone after the Fukishima accident.

I am sure there are many, many places in the United States that are farther then 50 miles from a nuclear power plant.

And what happened in Fukishima is about as serious as I think would possibly (worst-case scenario) happen on U.S. soil.
 
Last edited:
Not only would I tolerate it, I actively encourage it!
 
Im ok with it as long as its ran by a government agency or is extremely regulated by the government.

Yes, because we all know our government is so very efficient when it comes to running and/or regulating any industry............I thought the idea was cheaper, cleaner and more efficient.............under this premise, are you certain you want the federal govt running things? :shrug:
 
Absolutely. Nuclear power is by far the best option to meet the power needs of the country right now. Especially if we can start building things like molten salt reactors that are much more efficient and safer than the reactors they use today.
 
They are building another nuke plant within 20 miles of where I sit, along with the existing three-within-100-miles I already have.


I'm fine with that. Bring it on.

until you develop cancer.
 
We humans cracked the atom sometime in the early 1940's; built the first nuclear power plant anywhere on the planet in 1954 in the USSR. The US currently has 104 nuclear power plants.

Nuclear Energy Institute - U.S. Nuclear Power Plants

I can't believe I'm asking this, but I am. I'd rather have another one in my county than to have fraking for natural gas going on, or coal mining, or that benighted Keystone Pipeline.

What say you? Could we achieve energy independence via building more nuclear power plants, and if so, would you be willing to do so?

I would love my own pebblebed reactor. Too bad they wont let me have one.:(
 
Yes, because we all know our government is so very efficient when it comes to running and/or regulating any industry............I thought the idea was cheaper, cleaner and more efficient.............under this premise, are you certain you want the federal govt running things? :shrug:

I don't care if the plants are private or not, as long as they're extremely well-regulated.
 
Because of the legal costs. The environmental groups seeking a pay off legally run the cost of nuclear power up dramatically but worse is that "investors" look at the court system and figure they will lose - so they do not try. This is exactly what the left wanted. They legally made it impossible to build new nuclearly power plants. The same is nearly true of refineries - yes we are producing more oil but we still haven't built a new refinery in 30 years.


Well, since the idea seems to appeal across the board -- what's the hold up? Why aren't we building nuclear power plants rather than debating the Keystone Pipeline and handing out fraking licenses like candy?
 
hummm, i didnt know that. That CANT be good for our drinking water.

It surely is not....and this crap is being injected into the aquifer, not just surface water. Cheney frog-marched through regulations when he was in office so that no US company must disclose exactly what their fraking formula is, but we do have some data -- and none of it is good.

Ever see the documentary "Gasland"?


"Gasland" . NOW on PBS
 
Because of the legal costs. The environmental groups seeking a pay off legally run the cost of nuclear power up dramatically but worse is that "investors" look at the court system and figure they will lose - so they do not try. This is exactly what the left wanted. They legally made it impossible to build new nuclearly power plants. The same is nearly true of refineries - yes we are producing more oil but we still haven't built a new refinery in 30 years.

I never chained myself to a power plant construction site, but back in the day, my heart was with the protestors who did.

I still see no problem with a "zero tolerance" liability scheme -- t'aint like they can have "just a little leak". But I'm surprised this means that building such plants is economically unfeasible.

Even so, if the private sector can't or won't, I think our government should.
 
I don't care if the plants are private or not, as long as they're extremely well-regulated.

I agree with the level of regulation; however, my experience has been that when the fed govt attempts to control any industry......the costs usually end up far outweighing the benefits. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
You do know one chemical used in fraking is benzene?

Benzene in another term for gasoline, and it is used to thin petroleum based fracking fluid mixes. By the way its cracked from oil, the stuff they are trying to recover. Fracking is the short term for hydraulic fracturing. Think hydraulic jack. Pump up the pressure of the fluid in the ram and the ram goes up. Well hydraulic fracturing works similarly to that and ice in a closed container. The container breaks as the pressure from the ice expanding exceeds its strength thresshold. Same with hydraulic fracturing in rock formations using a different method. Sand is put into the fracturing mix to keep the rocks fractures expanded. We have been using some variation of enhanced recovery out were I live for a very long time since the forties I believe, due to the nature of the oil we are trying to recover some of which is very similar in consitancy to tar, like the Le Brea Tar pits.
 
Who is "they"?
Who do you think? The goverment duh. :lamo Its highly unlawful to posses let alone use enriched uranium in any form. Actually most any radiological is highly regulated. Believe me unless I live some where other than the US I aint gona be able to own my own nuclear reactor. Which sucks I could think of some very interesting and cool uses for that kinda electrical generating power. Oh well
 
Benzene in another term for gasoline, and it is used to thin petroleum based fracking fluid mixes. By the way its cracked from oil, the stuff they are trying to recover. Fracking is the short term for hydraulic fracturing. Think hydraulic jack. Pump up the pressure of the fluid in the ram and the ram goes up. Well hydraulic fracturing works similarly to that and ice in a closed container. The container breaks as the pressure from the ice expanding exceeds its strength thresshold. Same with hydraulic fracturing in rock formations using a different method. Sand is put into the fracturing mix to keep the rocks fractures expanded. We have been using some variation of enhanced recovery out were I live for a very long time since the forties I believe, due to the nature of the oil we are trying to recover some of which is very similar in consitancy to tar, like the Le Brea Tar pits.

You may be right, but this must be something new, Pirate. For one thing, it's spreading like wildfire and we have suburban communities here that are allowing it. Dat's right -- 300 feet from your back door is a fraking drill -- and good luck trying to sell your home after that.

Ohio's gone bat**** for this, and we used to control such activities at the municipal level. Now the state has all the control, and they apparently never say "no".
 
Who do you think? The goverment duh. :lamo Its highly unlawful to posses let alone use enriched uranium in any form. Actually most any radiological is highly regulated. Believe me unless I live some where other than the US I aint gona be able to own my own nuclear reactor. Which sucks I could think of some very interesting and cool uses for that kinda electrical generating power. Oh well

O, *duh*. Of course.

Still, if you want off the grid, there are technologies around that might could get you there -- one thing we all need is the right to sell excess power to the electric company, so none of needs a huge battery to store it. Parts of California have this -- maybe the whole state.
 
Yes, because we all know our government is so very efficient when it comes to running and/or regulating any industry............I thought the idea was cheaper, cleaner and more efficient.............under this premise, are you certain you want the federal govt running things? :shrug:

I do believe the government can do a good job when it comes to this and various other things. And yes.
 
You may be right, but this must be something new, Pirate. For one thing, it's spreading like wildfire and we have suburban communities here that are allowing it. Dat's right -- 300 feet from your back door is a fraking drill -- and good luck trying to sell your home after that.

Ohio's gone bat**** for this, and we used to control such activities at the municipal level. Now the state has all the control, and they apparently never say "no".

I dont know how they do things out there but out here if I had a well on my property I'd be a very happy camper. You coundn't get me to move. They cant just come on your land without compinsation for the use of it, even if they have mineral rights. The reason they are going for it is there is serious money in it for the property owner the well is on. If you own the miniral rights the oil companies will lease them from you and pay you a royalty for allowing them to put a well on your property. If you dont own the miniral rights they will lease your land for putting a well on your property. Your property will pay for itself and provide a tidy profit too, while oil prices are on the high side. That probaly why Ohio is going for oil drilling in a big way. Because every dime you make the state taxes and makes a handsome sum.
 
One side use for nuclear is food sterilization.... "nuked" foods can be stored without refrigeration, salmonella won't happen, etc.
Not for home use, though...
 
Well, you obviously have more faith in politicians than I. :shrug:

Not so much politicians but more the people themselves and the people who work for those politicians.
 
until you develop cancer.



Yup, everybody that lives within 20 miles of a nuke plant gets cancer, well known fact.


(/irony) :roll:
 
Back
Top Bottom