View Poll Results: Are You Interested In More Nuclear Power?

Voters
126. You may not vote on this poll
  • Hell no! Remember Chernobyl?

    21 16.67%
  • Don't know.

    3 2.38%
  • Maybe. What do the scientists say?

    29 23.02%
  • Absolutely! Every other idea is even worse.

    79 62.70%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 30 of 39 FirstFirst ... 202829303132 ... LastLast
Results 291 to 300 of 382

Thread: Would You Tolerate Nuclear Power For Energy Independence?

  1. #291
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: Would You Tolerate Nuclear Power For Energy Independence?

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    electrical power....we will still have an oil problem.
    EVs can knock that problem out. They're nibbling at the edges right while people get used to the idea. If all goes well, EVs will be taking big bites out of the problem.

    Quote Originally Posted by PirateMk1 View Post
    They said that 50 years ago. They still be working on it.
    If the ITER Fusion project goes well, then we might see production fusion in 20 years. Since large, complicated projects rarely follow the schedule, I'll be happy if we see production fusion in 25 years. So all that means we cannot rely upon it now. We have to find other solutions to hold us over until then.
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

  2. #292
    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: Would You Tolerate Nuclear Power For Energy Independence?

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    EVs can knock that problem out. They're nibbling at the edges right while people get used to the idea. If all goes well, EVs will be taking big bites out of the problem.



    If the ITER Fusion project goes well, then we might see production fusion in 20 years. Since large, complicated projects rarely follow the schedule, I'll be happy if we see production fusion in 25 years. So all that means we cannot rely upon it now. We have to find other solutions to hold us over until then.
    Fusion is not as close as they say.....read the Wikipedia article with a pessimistic view, and you will see that there are still lots of problems to overcome....
    radioactive tritium constantly being vented.....the difficulty of storing tritium.....coming up with a way to test the materials used to construct the reactor before actually using them.....end of life issues for the reactor itself (radioactive and cannot be hauled away).....
    20-25 years is within my expected lifespan, and I probably won't see it happen. Perhaps the rest of you are a lot younger?
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  3. #293
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,045

    Re: Would You Tolerate Nuclear Power For Energy Independence?

    More research and money should be put into this:

    Exclusive: Orbital solar power plants touted for energy needs | Reuters


    The sun's abundant energy, if harvested in space, could provide a cost-effective way to meet global power needs in as little as 30 years with seed money from governments, according to a study by an international scientific group.

    Orbiting power plants capable of collecting solar energy and beaming it to Earth appear "technically feasible" within a decade or two based on technologies now in the laboratory, a study group of the Paris-headquartered International Academy of Astronautics said.

  4. #294
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: Would You Tolerate Nuclear Power For Energy Independence?

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    Fusion is not as close as they say.....read the Wikipedia article with a pessimistic view, and you will see that there are still lots of problems to overcome....
    radioactive tritium constantly being vented.....the difficulty of storing tritium.....coming up with a way to test the materials used to construct the reactor before actually using them.....end of life issues for the reactor itself (radioactive and cannot be hauled away).....
    20-25 years is within my expected lifespan, and I probably won't see it happen. Perhaps the rest of you are a lot younger?
    20 - 25 years is a might optimistic. I think it is inevitable that we will get fusion into production. It's the "when" that's arguable. I'm not as old as you, but I'm at the age where I should seriously think about finding a doctor to keep as a friend and send him Christmas cards every year. I suppose it's conceit to presume fusion will go into production within my remaining lifespan. I think it's "hope" more than anything. It will solve a lot of problems, and I'd like to see a more settled world before I expire. Probably silly of me to expect that. We'll always have reasons to cause ourselves trouble, but hopefully energy will not be one of them.
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

  5. #295
    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: Would You Tolerate Nuclear Power For Energy Independence?

    Quote Originally Posted by EagleAye View Post
    20 - 25 years is a might optimistic. I think it is inevitable that we will get fusion into production. It's the "when" that's arguable. I'm not as old as you, but I'm at the age where I should seriously think about finding a doctor to keep as a friend and send him Christmas cards every year. I suppose it's conceit to presume fusion will go into production within my remaining lifespan. I think it's "hope" more than anything. It will solve a lot of problems, and I'd like to see a more settled world before I expire. Probably silly of me to expect that. We'll always have reasons to cause ourselves trouble, but hopefully energy will not be one of them.
    make sure your doctor is a lot younger than you, sucks to outlive one and have to go through all that adjustment period again....one that I quit seeing was older, very fat, smoked, had high blood pressure, and he told me that I should exercise because my good cholesterol was a bit low. All the other lab work always looks good....
    he isn't dead yet, but he doesn't have far to go...
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  6. #296
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,821

    Re: Would You Tolerate Nuclear Power For Energy Independence?

    There needs to be a poll option for "Nuclear power is awesome whats wrong with you idiots."

    Nuclear powers death rate per-kwH is lower than solar.

    Read that sentence again.

    It's the safest power source we have, by a wide margin. It's also the most energy-dense, which is important given our enormous energy demands which are ever-increasing.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  7. #297
    Sage
    EagleAye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Last Seen
    03-28-13 @ 09:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    5,697

    Re: Would You Tolerate Nuclear Power For Energy Independence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    There needs to be a poll option for "Nuclear power is awesome whats wrong with you idiots."

    Nuclear powers death rate per-kwH is lower than solar.

    Read that sentence again.

    It's the safest power source we have, by a wide margin. It's also the most energy-dense, which is important given our enormous energy demands which are ever-increasing.
    Amen, brother.
    Check out my Blog http://momusnews.wordpress.com/
    Sherry's Photography site: http://www.sheywicklundphotos.com/

  8. #298
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: Would You Tolerate Nuclear Power For Energy Independence?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    More research and money should be put into this:

    Exclusive: Orbital solar power plants touted for energy needs | Reuters


    The sun's abundant energy, if harvested in space, could provide a cost-effective way to meet global power needs in as little as 30 years with seed money from governments, according to a study by an international scientific group.

    Orbiting power plants capable of collecting solar energy and beaming it to Earth appear "technically feasible" within a decade or two based on technologies now in the laboratory, a study group of the Paris-headquartered International Academy of Astronautics said.
    How many years now have we heard such promises? How many years have we been told that fusion power will emerge? How about the promise of Solar? Or electric powered vehicles or even hydrogen-powered?

    Where are we to get the money to invest? We already run, at least the last 4 years or so at over a Trillion dollar annual deficit. Is that likely to improve in the near future, maybe you think so, but I don't see it. We could cut 100% of defense spending and that would still leave over $200 billion a year in deficit spending if that were the only cuts made.

    Certainly we should pursue alternate means, but we also have to work with existing technologies to survive to the point that these other means become available, if they ever do. The government is trying to shut down 175 power generation plants in the next 4 years or less due to "environmental concerns". Are there replacement plants already built? Are we going to replace them prior to a new technology emerging capable of that amount of generation? If the concern is pollution from these plants, why have they not been or planed to be replaced by nuclear which has no airborne environmental pollutants?
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  9. #299
    Anti political parties
    FreedomFromAll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    New Mexico USA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,045

    Re: Would You Tolerate Nuclear Power For Energy Independence?

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    How many years now have we heard such promises? How many years have we been told that fusion power will emerge? How about the promise of Solar? Or electric powered vehicles or even hydrogen-powered?

    Where are we to get the money to invest? We already run, at least the last 4 years or so at over a Trillion dollar annual deficit. Is that likely to improve in the near future, maybe you think so, but I don't see it. We could cut 100% of defense spending and that would still leave over $200 billion a year in deficit spending if that were the only cuts made.

    Certainly we should pursue alternate means, but we also have to work with existing technologies to survive to the point that these other means become available, if they ever do. The government is trying to shut down 175 power generation plants in the next 4 years or less due to "environmental concerns". Are there replacement plants already built? Are we going to replace them prior to a new technology emerging capable of that amount of generation? If the concern is pollution from these plants, why have they not been or planed to be replaced by nuclear which has no airborne environmental pollutants?
    Where are we going to get the money to build nuclear power stations or to keep the ones we have running as the age? Where will we get the money to clean up our own nuclear cartography?

    And please do not try to make me argue against your strawman argument.

    What I am asserting is that we need to make advances in power production not just keep spending money on old technology. And nuclear power plants are old technology.

    I dont know if you read the article that I linked, but its talking about an endless supply of power. Given that it is in space the solar energy is much higher than on the surface. Such a power station could catapult the economy in a way that nuclear never could. You should really research the subject of that link before lumping it in with fusion and regular solar power.

  10. #300
    Sage
    Quag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,023

    Re: Would You Tolerate Nuclear Power For Energy Independence?

    Quote Originally Posted by FreedomFromAll View Post
    Where are we going to get the money to build nuclear power stations or to keep the ones we have running as the age? Where will we get the money to clean up our own nuclear cartography?

    And please do not try to make me argue against your strawman argument.

    What I am asserting is that we need to make advances in power production not just keep spending money on old technology. And nuclear power plants are old technology.

    I dont know if you read the article that I linked, but its talking about an endless supply of power. Given that it is in space the solar energy is much higher than on the surface. Such a power station could catapult the economy in a way that nuclear never could. You should really research the subject of that link before lumping it in with fusion and regular solar power.
    I have heard of this before, and it does seem promising only trouble is it is still too far away, even the article states 30 years from now. Given the history of overly optomisitic predictions on timelines for technology I would be pleased if this happens within 50 years. The study also did not estimate the price tag either, which may make it prohibitive.
    So even best case scenario 30 years out we get this technology what do you do in the meantime? We need the energy today not 30 years from now. To get any large scale energy project going takes time, Wind/solar/nuclear/oil/coal/hydro all take time. Wind/solar as it stands now cannot supply all the energy required, so that leaves, coal/oil the fastest 2 to build but with obvious downsides or Hydro and nuclear. Hydro is not feasible in all locations and does have a negative effect on the environment itself, Nuclear can be placed anywhere but like Hydro takes soem tiem to get going and there is the waste disposal issue.

    Saying lets do nothing untill some future tech gets here is really playing with fire, What if the tehcnology fails or takes much longer than expected? What if it is so cost prohibitive that it becomes unfeasable?
    I do not have the answers to these questions and as far as I know no one does. Untill there are answers all sources of energy should be investigated.
    A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
    Winston Churchill



    A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.
    Winston Churchill

Page 30 of 39 FirstFirst ... 202829303132 ... 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
  •