Page 1 of 3
What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 1:07 am
by jonka
Integral fast reactors could potentially power the US at current power levels for
500 years, using only
Nuclear Waste, that has been stocked up. There are currently none, it was a successful prototype killed by the idiots who prefered oil. But now we're starting to run out
OK, so I'll now address the 3 main issues, Waste, the possibilities of weapons being made from the materials, and Safety.
-
Waste- Integral fast reactors reuse their waste products to the point that they are basically ash. (99.5% of the energy is extracted from the fuel, compared to 1% in conventional nuclear reactors)
-
Weapons-Plutonium is never separated in the nuclear processes, so you would be unable to make a nuclear bomb from it (unless you already can make nukes, but who cares)
-
Safety-
Meltdowns Hanford proved that with there new method of leaving extra room in the Fuel casing, a meltdown is impossible. As it heats up, the fuel expands, but with the extra room it gets to the point where it is no longer a feasible chain reaction, and cools. This experiment was done without any human or computer interference, at full power, with no control rods, if it didn't melt then it won't ever.
Radiation This is hardly an issue anymore, no radiation escapes the reactor. In fact, several nuclear power plants have had farmers rent the nearby land, and the radiation kicked up by plowing the dirt set off alarms in the plants, so they had to make the farmers leave. The job safest from radiation is in fact being on Nuclear submarines
. And people cringe at the thought of nuclear plants. And Irregardless of this, if Radiation somehow did escape, it would not hurt nearly as many people as are killed by cancer caused by fossil fuel burning plants.
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:31 am
by demonfork
hmmm...
energy density of petroleum = 45 MJ/kg
energy density of Reactor Grade Uranium = 3.7x10^6 MJ/kg
pretty clear choice, if you can get around the global elite.
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 5:47 am
by grandin
jonka wrote:What is so bad about nuclear power?
jonka wrote:Hanford proved that with there new method of leaving extra room in the Fuel casing, a meltdown is impossible.
jonka wrote:if Radiation somehow did escape, it would not hurt nearly as many people as are killed by cancer caused by fossil fuel burning plants.
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 5:50 am
by grandin
And of course:
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:43 am
by PLAYER57832
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:55 am
by Nobunaga
... Three Mile Island wasn't quite the disater it was portrayed to be.
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/threemile.html#...
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 8:44 am
by azezzo
I have worked in 5 different nuclear power plants, the problem isnt with nuclear power, but with the people running the power plants, for instance Zion nuclear, just north of chicago, was shut down not because of anything physically wrong with the plant, but rather with the idiots running it. We dont really want our nuclear plants looking anything like the simpsons, do we?
These new style of nuclear plants sound like a great solution, most of the existing plants are nearing the end of their expected life expectancy, or already have. The immediate construction of newer safer nuclear plants would create enough jobs to pull the usa out of its recession as well as providing a safe clean alternative to fossil fuels.
and as Bob Marley said,
"Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery;
None but ourselves can free our minds.
Have no fear for atomic energy,
'Cause none of them can stop the time.
How long shall they kill our prophets,
While we stand aside and look? Ooh!
Some say it's just a part of it:
We've got to fulfil de book."
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 8:47 am
by azezzo
PLAYER57832 wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident
like i said, "The mechanical failures were compounded by the initial failure of plant operators to recognize the situation as a loss of coolant accident due to inadequate training and ambiguous control room indicators."
homer simpson does exist, and he does work in a nuclear power plant, we need to pay qualified people to work there, Take for instance the security guards who work there, do you really want an old lady, or old man walking around with an m16, the recoil would break her shoulder. The in house employees do not get paid as well as the subcontractors who come in every year and a half to do the maintance needed to keep these old plants running. After 9/11 with the stock market crashing the corporations needed to find ways to increase profits, guess how they did it in the nuclear plants? By breaking existing union contracts, laying off employees, cutting salaries. I for 1 think that there should be more people taking care of these old plants, not less. The old plants are out dated and in need of overhauls, they were not built and designed to have lasted as long as they have, they should be replaced with new safer ones.
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 8:51 am
by nietzsche
with great power comes great responsability lol
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 9:06 am
by PLAYER57832
nietzsche wrote:with great power comes great responsability lol
Exactly .. that three mile island was not a COMPLETE disaster, that even today people still lack the training they need...
None of this bodes well.
That said, there could come a time when nuclear power needs to be revisited. For now, I believe we have many other options.
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 9:21 am
by azezzo
look, we dont allow children perform surgery, but with education, and training a child can become a brain surgeon.
Exelon and the other corporations need to pay qualified people to run and maintain their facilities. The N.R.C. needs to continually oversee these plants and make sure that everything is done properly. The money is already there, with every electric bill that you pay, a portion goes directly to the nuclear plants, the corporate greed is the real problem. For every day that a nuclear reactor is shut down, the corporation loses over a million dollars.
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 9:40 am
by jonka
PLAYER57832 wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident
And they've fixed the meltdown problem.
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:02 pm
by PLAYER57832
azezzo wrote:look, we dont allow children perform surgery, but with education, and training a child can become a brain surgeon.
Exelon and the other corporations need to pay qualified people to run and maintain their facilities. The N.R.C. needs to continually oversee these plants and make sure that everything is done properly. The money is already there, with every electric bill that you pay, a portion goes directly to the nuclear plants, the corporate greed is the real problem. For every day that a nuclear reactor is shut down, the corporation loses over a million dollars.
Agreed to a point. however, as long as these problems persist, do we really want to give more of them the power to destroy the Earth? (or at least a good patch of the US)
jonka wrote:PLAYER57832 wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident
And they've fixed the meltdown problem.
Correction, they have fixed
some problems. Many others remain .. including some we probably don't even currently know exist.
Is it really worth risking all life for a thousand miles around?
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:12 pm
by GabonX
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:16 pm
by PLAYER57832
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:26 pm
by GabonX
Because if it works it is revolutionary.
It essentially makes the old system obsolete.
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:34 pm
by PLAYER57832
GabonX wrote:Because if it works it is revolutionary.
It essentially makes the old system obsolete.
"if" ... but it has yet to work. Most of the article is critical of the program as a boondoggle.
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 3:56 pm
by Borderdawg
I do believe azezzo has the right idea. We have to invest more in nuclear power plants and insist on properly trained personnel. Lets face it, coal powered plants are outdated, and solar/wind power, while very good ideas that work on a small scale, will never be able to provide the power necessary for large urban areas such as New York or L.A., or even for large commercial operations.
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 4:06 pm
by PLAYER57832
Borderdawg wrote:I do believe azezzo has the right idea. We have to invest more in nuclear power plants and insist on properly trained personnel. Lets face it, coal powered plants are outdated, and solar/wind power, while very good ideas that work on a small scale, will never be able to provide the power necessary for large urban areas such as New York or L.A., or even for large commercial operations.
I am afraid you are correct, but the real answer is to do with less...
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 6:46 pm
by azezzo
ok guys let me bring up another point, as i have said b4 all of our american nuclear power plants are old, they were not built or designed to last this long, so what happens, walk thru a plant and you will see request for repair tags on various items, some over a year old, now these repair tags are on the visible problems, alot of problems are not visible and are not found until something breaks, or a scheduled outage comes up, about every 1 n 1/2 years per reactor, when either they go looking for problems, like xray-ing structural steel to see if its eroding from the inside out, or opening up parts of the reactor which has been sealed up since the previous outage, but things are not always fixed when found, if the radiation levels are too high, or the airbourne contamination is too high, they at times will decide to fix it "next" time. I'm not making this up. How about the radiaoactive leaks, liquid, oh yah, thats a problem too. I have had my share of showers to remove contamination.
Any ways, my point is its expensive and time consuming to fix old things, if there is new safer technology, lets make use of it and decomission these older plants, forget about the cost of new plants, that shouldnt be a consideration, can we afford a serious problem with an older plant, sure the safe gaurds are there to shut down a plant if an emergency arises, but then we are still fixing an old problem, sure you can keep your car running for 20+ years with repairs but its not as safe or efficient as a newer model. Also keep in mind that as the population continues to grow, our energy needs increase as well.
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:15 pm
by Juan_Bottom
I would also like to point out that there is a growing school of thought that using wind power may have just as big of an environmental impact as coal power. Dangerous.
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:27 pm
by azezzo
wind power is clean, but not efficient, dont get me wrong theres a place for it, but will not be our primary source of electricity
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:46 pm
by Symmetry
azezzo wrote:wind power is clean, but not efficient, dont get me wrong theres a place for it, but will not be our primary source of electricity
I generally agree, but in many areas of the world alternative energy can be a self-sufficient source of electricity. Wind, solar, tidal, wave, geo-thermal, etc., power sources can all sufficiently provide local power needs. Indeed- they can generate so much electricity that power can be sold back to the companies.
These technologies have advanced in huge leaps in the past decade alone, and this with minimal investment compared to that spent on fossil fuel companies or nuclear facilities. Serious investment in this stuff is needed. That means investment in research, and subsidies to get this stuff in place in communities where it can work already.
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 9:42 pm
by jonka
The problem with these, is that they produce relatively little power, and they are geographically limited, not enough to lend it to somewhere that needs it.
PLAYER57832 wrote:jonka wrote:PLAYER57832 wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident
And they've fixed the meltdown problem.
Correction, they have fixed
some problems. Many others remain .. including some we probably don't even currently know exist.
Is it really worth risking all life for a thousand miles around?
Can you clarify for me which problems they haven't fixed? Its not that complex. But first let me ask you this, do you even know how a nuclear reactor works?
Re: What is so bad about nuclear power?
Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 9:47 pm
by PLAYER57832
Juan_Bottom wrote:I would also like to point out that there is a growing school of thought that using wind power may have just as big of an environmental impact as coal power. Dangerous.
Wind power takes up a LOT of space. Both solar and wind require a fair number of resources in limited supply (particularly solar-- right now, its OK, but if demand steps up a lot, there could be problems).