First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Why are we not building more nuclear power plants ?
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 3/29/09

leviathan343 wrote:

Uh, wrong. Solar power is currently limited by an inefficient conversion process and the relative expense of constructing panels, as well as limited storing capabilities. It's not economically viable to invest it.


Solar is usefull maybe as a back up plant, but not as a primary source of electricity, solar only works during the day and also requires that it isnt cloudy or foggy or smoggy. nuclear can provide limitless energy for a long ass time, and the spent fuel rods can be reused again. seems like the way to go to me.

2633 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / New York City, NY
Offline
Posted 3/29/09

Allhailodin wrote:


leviathan343 wrote:

Uh, wrong. Solar power is currently limited by an inefficient conversion process and the relative expense of constructing panels, as well as limited storing capabilities. It's not economically viable to invest it.


Solar is usefull maybe as a back up plant, but not as a primary source of electricity, solar only works during the day and also requires that it isnt cloudy or foggy or smoggy. nuclear can provide limitless energy for a long ass time, and the spent fuel rods can be reused again. seems like the way to go to me.



Okay I agree.
18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 3/29/09
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0UzdYRnMtY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nE4LzddB3PI&feature=channel

10694 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 3/29/09
nuclear power plants today are much safer than they were 20-30 years ago. they are able to produce mass quantities of energy and would be able to reduce our dependence on oil. however the main problem with nuclear power is nuclear waste. most nuclear waste produced by nuclear reactors is highly radioactive and if it isn't disposed of properly, there are adverse affects on the environment. the problem is that we haven't found a way to store nuclear waste safely for the hundreds of thousands to millions of years it would take until it loses enough radioactivity to be no longer deemed as harmful.

right now several countries are planning on mining deep into the ground to create underground vaults to store nuclear waste in. however we don't know if those vaults can stand the test of time required. also nuclear waste deposit sites need to constantly monitored for leaks which the united states and other countries did not do until recently which has caused nearby soil and groundwater to become contaminated.

the US government is also actively researching nuclear transmutation. transmutation is basically changing from one isotope to another which is similar to ideas like alchemy. transmutation would be used to change the longer lasting radioisotopes into ones with much shorter half lives. these in turn would only have to be stored maybe tens of years for their harmful radiation to disappear. a breakthrough in this area of study would be highly beneficial and help the nuclear power cause greatly.

in the end more research still needs to be done on how to effectively and safely deal with nuclear waste before nuclear power can be harnessed en-masse.
5229 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Mammago Garage, Y...
Offline
Posted 3/29/09

Allhailodin wrote:


Darkphoenix3450 wrote:

'why work on new forms of power, such as harnessing the power from plants, by using Bio-enganering to create a plant that gives of great amounts of Energy maby A bactera. ' its not as far fetched as your thinking. Scientest can make mice that are born able to glow in the dark, Tomatos that can handle the cold, and even Viruses that attack and kill bad cells. Such as Cancer Cells.


Glow in the dark mice ? I dont care what anyone says thats awesome, make a sweet pet. But yeah, plants use a neat little technique that poses some possibility called photosynthensis that could make tons of energy in a 1/2 plant 1/2 machine hybrid. And then you have bacteria our endless little friends that could also be used to make electricity i guess. have em break down something organic and use the methane from that to power the reactor.


The problem with glow-in-the dark animals is that I think they die quickly, so it wouldn't be a very good pet. But anyway...

Photosynthesis doesn't produce a lot of energy, which is why plants can't move much (they can't produce enough energy to support relatively complex functions like continuous movement). The energy they make from photosynthesis is mostly just sugars used for cellular respiration, so I don't think that would be useful unless we can make machines that run on glucose.

The bacteria thing might work, I saw something on Dirty Jobs about some guy running his whole farm using the methane that comes from the cow manure. But the amount he had to use was hazardous, and lethal if you stayed around it too long. It would take millions of times more methane to run an entire city, and I'm guessing that processing and maintaining all of that would be way too dangerous and expensive.
20924 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Singapore
Offline
Posted 3/30/09
There is other alternative energy than Nuclear. We got wind, hydroelectric, biomass, solar.

what if someone misuse the plants for something else...?
18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 3/30/09

Cuddlebuns wrote:


Allhailodin wrote:


Darkphoenix3450 wrote:

'why work on new forms of power, such as harnessing the power from plants, by using Bio-enganering to create a plant that gives of great amounts of Energy maby A bactera. ' its not as far fetched as your thinking. Scientest can make mice that are born able to glow in the dark, Tomatos that can handle the cold, and even Viruses that attack and kill bad cells. Such as Cancer Cells.


Glow in the dark mice ? I dont care what anyone says thats awesome, make a sweet pet. But yeah, plants use a neat little technique that poses some possibility called photosynthensis that could make tons of energy in a 1/2 plant 1/2 machine hybrid. And then you have bacteria our endless little friends that could also be used to make electricity i guess. have em break down something organic and use the methane from that to power the reactor.


The problem with glow-in-the dark animals is that I think they die quickly, so it wouldn't be a very good pet. But anyway...

Photosynthesis doesn't produce a lot of energy, which is why plants can't move much (they can't produce enough energy to support relatively complex functions like continuous movement). The energy they make from photosynthesis is mostly just sugars used for cellular respiration, so I don't think that would be useful unless we can make machines that run on glucose.

The bacteria thing might work, I saw something on Dirty Jobs about some guy running his whole farm using the methane that comes from the cow manure. But the amount he had to use was hazardous, and lethal if you stayed around it too long. It would take millions of times more methane to run an entire city, and I'm guessing that processing and maintaining all of that would be way too dangerous and expensive.

Thats why I was talking about Bio-engineering it. By changing its DNA your able to create A plant, that gives off power naturaly.
I know it sounds like something ms. Poison Ivee would do.
Posted 3/30/09 , edited 3/30/09
They are safe yet there have been accidents due to human error. I don't trust nuclear power, regardless of what people say. My country is anti nuclear and I stick by it (or at least the majority is, I hope that hasn't changed). Unfortunately our new government thinks it's a great plan to use more coal instead of other options. It's too bad expenses always seem to outweigh the benefits. I'm mostly referring to my own country here, but I know we can afford more alternatives when we go and spend billions on a giant stadium. Still on the alternative power topic, it's out there, we have a lot of wind farms here that are doing us good.
I need to look more into this issue before I can make any proper comments but I really don't want nuclear power. I simply don't trust people.

Though to my own understanding solar power can be stored. How do you think those solar garden lights work at night?
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 3/30/09

cerisey wrote:

They are safe yet there have been accidents due to human error. I don't trust nuclear power, regardless of what people say. My country is anti nuclear and I stick by it (or at least the majority is, I hope that hasn't changed). Unfortunately our new government thinks it's a great plan to use more coal instead of other options. It's too bad expenses always seem to outweigh the benefits. I'm mostly referring to my own country here, but I know we can afford more alternatives when we go and spend billions on a giant stadium. Still on the alternative power topic, it's out there, we have a lot of wind farms here that are doing us good.
I need to look more into this issue before I can make any proper comments but I really don't want nuclear power. I simply don't trust people.

Though to my own understanding solar power can be stored. How do you think those solar garden lights work at night?


There have been accidents at coal and natural gas power plants too, a few accidents here and there are to be expected and are ok, nuclear power is far safer then people think it is and besides what are we going to do when we run out of oil ? eventually we will have no choice but to go nuclear, nuclear is the answer to the worlds energy problems,
18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 3/30/09 , edited 3/30/09

Allhailodin wrote:


cerisey wrote:

They are safe yet there have been accidents due to human error. I don't trust nuclear power, regardless of what people say. My country is anti nuclear and I stick by it (or at least the majority is, I hope that hasn't changed). Unfortunately our new government thinks it's a great plan to use more coal instead of other options. It's too bad expenses always seem to outweigh the benefits. I'm mostly referring to my own country here, but I know we can afford more alternatives when we go and spend billions on a giant stadium. Still on the alternative power topic, it's out there, we have a lot of wind farms here that are doing us good.
I need to look more into this issue before I can make any proper comments but I really don't want nuclear power. I simply don't trust people.

Though to my own understanding solar power can be stored. How do you think those solar garden lights work at night?


There have been accidents at coal and natural gas power plants too, a few accidents here and there are to be expected and are ok, nuclear power is far safer then people think it is and besides what are we going to do when we run out of oil ? eventually we will have no choice but to go nuclear, nuclear is the answer to the worlds energy problems,


Bahh I still say supper plants are! Maby a Plant/Tech High breed.
4980 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / ireland
Offline
Posted 3/30/09
we should follow Frances example of nuclear power,they even have energy left for export and the energy amount created by fission is vast.However what about storing potentially dangerous nuclear waste?And the memorty of chernobyl is holding things back.Also an accident at sellafield in the UK,could be disastrous for Ireland.There certainly are problems but also advantages too
Posted 3/30/09

Allhailodin wrote:


leviathan343 wrote:

Uh, wrong. Solar power is currently limited by an inefficient conversion process and the relative expense of constructing panels, as well as limited storing capabilities. It's not economically viable to invest it.


Solar is usefull maybe as a back up plant, but not as a primary source of electricity, solar only works during the day and also requires that it isnt cloudy or foggy or smoggy. nuclear can provide limitless energy for a long ass time, and the spent fuel rods can be reused again. seems like the way to go to me.



Bs.
9174 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / The Milky Way ......
Offline
Posted 3/30/09
They have problems trying to find places to build them. People tend to say "Not in my backyard!". It's the same thing with planes. Most people think that riding in a car is safer than riding in a plane. When in fact the chances of you getting in an accident on a plane is way lower than an accident by car. Nuclear Plants are very safe but still just the thought of something happening makes people afraid. Just think about the Chernobyl accident, it released more toxic chemicals into the air than both atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. It affected hundreds of thousands of peoples lives. Also nuclear power plants are not perfect they still haven't found a solution as to where they should put the toxic waste. In my opinion they should focus on safer ways to harness energy. Plus nuclear power plants are not that easy to build there freakin EXPENSIVE! All the Safety crap. and the workers. Personally i think it's more cost effecient to look for other means of energy.
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 3/30/09 , edited 3/30/09

ec1032am wrote:

They have problems trying to find places to build them. People tend to say "Not in my backyard!". It's the same thing with planes. Most people think that riding in a car is safer than riding in a plane. When in fact the chances of you getting in an accident on a plane is way lower than an accident by car. Nuclear Plants are very safe but still just the thought of something happening makes people afraid. Just think about the Chernobyl accident, it released more toxic chemicals into the air than both atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. It affected hundreds of thousands of peoples lives. Also nuclear power plants are not perfect they still haven't found a solution as to where they should put the toxic waste. In my opinion they should focus on safer ways to harness energy. Plus nuclear power plants are not that easy to build there freakin EXPENSIVE! All the Safety crap. and the workers. Personally i think it's more cost effecient to look for other means of energy.


The Chernoby accident will never happen again, modern reactors simply will not allow those conditions to happen, they'll shut themselves down before that ever becomes an issue, and even if they did the containment field would stop the radation before it ever got outside the plant, modern reactors are safer then coal burning and natural gas power plants. Chernoby didnt have a containment feild, besides can't rely on oil forever, it'll run out eventually and solar is useless. nuclear is the answer.
Posted 3/30/09
^ again BS. I highly suggest you get your facts checked before spouting any more nonsense.
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.