nuclear energy!!! whats it worth to us? - Page 3

wraithe · #41 22-05-2006, 11:16 AM

ahh, research..i really think the nuclear reactor should have stayed in the research phase till all aspects of the process had been proven and developed correctly...
I am not against the idea being a solution but its not the solution that people think it is.. at this stage it is as ecologically damaging as burning coal and then on top of that, the waste is here for 10,000+ years...its not for 1,000 years but tens of thousands...the decay of the waste does not get less dangerous but increase in its danger for 20,000 years...and i dont know about you guys but my childrens children will be here and there children will be, and logically we should consider the consequences of our actions now...you cant change the past and you cant just say "well it wasnt for me to worry about as tomorrow never comes"...thats not true and any body in this world should remember that...
A lot of researchers would love to have access to some of the research money that has been put into nuclear energy and some of them dont need much to prove there inventions...
Hitler during world war 2 decide that if a project was not viable in a short period of time then it would get no more support..well we know that he lost the war, but go read about the projects he left by the wayside...we could all be saluting his victory by now...is it way politics is going right now...install nuclear power because it is here now but forget the projects that may prove nuclear power as a waste...just give them the dole and tell them to go away we are not interested..
I am thinking of the future not just 20 or 50 years but way beyond my life expectancy...all this use of nuclear power is not real smart, considering we really have no idea of the long term concequences to our planet...
At the end of the day, the greenies have been a pain but where i live, the farmers are very green in there ways..ok they believe in cutting down trees and so do i..why, because you can grow another...steel leaves a big hole in the ground so why use it...we have enough waste on this planet and need to learn to recycle that..not produce more waste we cant do anything with...

wraithe · #42 22-05-2006, 11:25 AM

Fossil fuels (oil, gas, coal) the dominant energy today, are being rapidly exhausted, and are the cause of wide scale pollution of our environment, while nuclear and renewable energies are much cleaner : they have absolutely no global effect, produce only very small amounts of waste that are easy to manage, don't affect the planet's climate, and these energy sources (renewable energies and clean nuclear energy), if well managed, are sustainable in the very long term

this is a quote from environmentalists for nuclear...
hmmm, now what is wrong with this quote...
very small amounts of waste..yes like 250 kgs per year per power reactor...
only need 5 kgs to build a nuclear bomb that would wipe any city that any one here lives in...
dont be surprised how powerful plutonium can be...

wraithe · #43 22-05-2006, 11:32 AM

well i'm going to leave this thread for a while...
and i have just the quote to add here...
it comes from the environmentalists for nuclear power...

As a dedicated environmentalist, I consider it paradoxical to see some environmental groups opposed to nuclear energy. Green opposition to nuclear power plants is in fact a major historical mistake. Their announced concerns are for health, safety, and the protection of nature. In these respects nuclear power is by far superior to the alternatives - burning fossil fuels (coal, petroleum and gas) which pollute the atmosphere, wind turbines or the use of solar photovoltaic cells for the production of electricity, and biomass (growing crops to be burned and burning crop residues) which alter the landscape and produce only minute amounts of energy.
It is a fundamental fact that population growth and increasing standard of living are precipitating an energy crisis which is not being met, and which cannot be met in the long term, say in the lifetime of our children and grandchildren, without recourse to nuclear fission.
Well-designed, well-constructed, well-operated and well-maintained nuclear energy is very clean, safe, durable and economical.
It produces little carbon dioxide, and no sulfur dioxide or nitrogen oxides; these are produced in vast quantities when fossil fuels are burned, and they are injected (dumped) into the atmosphere.
Unlike solar cells, wind turbines and growing biomass which cover large areas, a nuclear power station is very compact; it occupies typically the area of a football stadium and its surrounding parking lots.
While a little carbon dioxide is emitted in construction (but the same can be said of windmills and photovoltaic cells), none is emitted in operation; thus nuclear power makes a minimum contribution to the greenhouse effect.
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e1...or-circuit.jpg
check the out flow of the nuclear process...
read the place the heated water is released from...

mickoking · #44 22-05-2006, 09:30 PM

I don't think there is much public support for nuclear energy in Australia anyway.

gaa_ian (Ian) · #45 22-05-2006, 10:10 PM

I hope you are right Micko, the important question is weather there is enough public opposition too it !

mickoking · #46 22-05-2006, 10:34 PM

Good point Ian. Aussies have always been a somewhat apathetic species. Since 9/11 and this whole terrorism thing I believe our apathy has just increased and generally the average Australian has lost interest in subjects like nuclear power and the environment.

We put too much trust in Pollies and beauracrats, not a healthy attitude in a 21'st century democracy.

Just my 2 bobs worth

fringe_dweller · #47 22-05-2006, 10:52 PM

I see everyone is quite rightly worried about the future, and the future for their kids. well have you considered Oz becoming a second or third world country/'banana republic' will do for your kids future and the future of the enviroment?
We need additional power stations to the existing conventional ones, and we cant afford (on an enviromental scale) to have any more coal fired ones than we already have or exceed our already quota (I think from memory that conventional power stations are responsible for 25%/30% of all our green house emissions now in this country)

Soooo whats left? cover the entire country every square inch - coast to coast in great big pretty whirly gigs will solve all our ills? gag, pleeeease!
(i dont think they would like as good to anyone if they had to live with them in their face 24/7/52/365)
We need additional ones to move ahead and remedy loss of rainfall, and create and encourage industries to fatten the coffers so we continue this great aussie lifestyle.
Or maybe you wanna trade in that monster 4WD for a pushbike and start reading the Dharma everyday while eating your lentil and turnip soup?
France (as I heard it) has some of/the? cheapest power in the world, and its nearly all nuke generated.
This burying our heads in the sand and pretending that some mysterious saviour of new renewable free and plentiful energy is a bit like waiting for the second coming! i am bored of waiting the saviour energy.
Funny how all the anti-nuke ppl can easily believe that this saviour is coming, but not believe the same minds cant come up with a way of safely disposing/nuetralising nuke waste, even before the famous 200 000 years is up!! weird!.
We wouldnt even be here if it wasnt for nuclear energy /radioactivity - well knownly - the very ingrediants we are made of came from the nuclear furnaces of supernovas, some many beneficial mutations in evolution we enjoy possibly come from dna molecules encounters with deadly cosmic rays ect. (spiderman comes to mind here) what about the sun do you find that handy or what? creating that nice big cosy bubble of solar radiation we live in that protects us from all sorts of other nasties!

fringe_dweller · #48 22-05-2006, 10:58 PM

In a recent survey aussies were asked what they thought about Apathy.
90% responded 'they dont care'

its what makes this country great!

ACE · #49 23-05-2006, 11:10 AM

If the equivalent amt of money was spent on the various governments on defense was spent into furthering research in maximizing Solar energy, we by now may have a viable source of power.

Why haven't we developed the ultimate solar cell by now? Why isn't it in each household roof by now.

If more money was spent in renewable energies as solar/wind/geo thermal/bio then maybe we wouldn't be in this predicament we're in now. Its not like this is news, its been in our faces for at least 20yrs.

Has solar technology currently reached its maximum theorectical limits known to man at this moment in time. I mean, if they could develop new materials in the 60's for the Mercury/Gemini/Apollo projects surely you'd think the same effort could be done for renewable energies to make it work efficiently.

robagar · #50 23-05-2006, 12:23 PM

Yes, fitting solar panels to existing buildings should be subsidized by the government, and required by law on new builds. It's madness that this famously sunny country doesn't take advantage of what it's got (apart from the huge reserves of coal of course

)

wraithe · #51 23-05-2006, 12:51 PM

What is wrong with being conservative...
I mean really do we need to have a thousand lights on all the time...
we have low power movement sensors at our disposal, why not use them...
flood lights can be replaced by flouro ones...
house lights only cost a small amount to run but they can be a little savings..
i replaced my washing machine with a new one and looked for the most economical one for power and water...
Really if we push the household savings it can filter up through peoples attitudes changing...
and believe me, people will listen if you keep it simple...with your hobby, everyone of you will have an understanding what a planet will look like with a few extra degrees up or down..both ways are deserts when that temp is consistant...so what happens when the atmosphere completely collapses...I dont just condemn nuclear power, but all forms of destructive power...
i even feel guilty by using a pc when i dont have a solar panel outside...
My son and I have been discussing getting rid of the car and just having a motorbike, or gettin rid of both...it is feasible..push bike is not possible for me as i have some disability, but i can live with not having all these gadgets if it will make a difference..i think with a bit of suggesting by us all we can preserve our planet, but to have all these gadgets, we will destroy it...
Anyone remember the 70's and 80's, all the talks about the way the earth will kill itself and the polly's and so called scientists saying that, those scientists saying we are in trouble now,are all nutters...funny, how come what they predicted is happening faster, and the polly's are still telling us they have the answers..they never did then, why would they now...
I think people need to look more closely or err on the side of caution...If someone has no idea the polly will love them and call the person speaking up "a nutter"...
I have been on the recieving end of people like that, and i can tell you its not nice and then those same criticisers come knocking and want help, well yes i'm a fool cause i do help, but i am getting sick of being put down then being asked to help...now i am speaking up and this world needs to think about tomorrow not today...it even applies to buying things.."i want it now" well how about wait for a change, get some patience world and stop wrecking the only place we have to "live"!

ving (David) · #52 23-05-2006, 12:55 PM

actually what was said just a few post up was interesting... I to dobt there are many aussies actually for newkiller power, but also you wont find many against... we are too laid back and our govt just walks over us with out she'll be right/it doesnt bother me/someone else'll do it atitudes

our decisions are made for us thru inaction

wraithe · #53 23-05-2006, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robagar

Yes, fitting solar panels to existing buildings should be subsidized by the government, and required by law on new builds. It's madness that this famously sunny country doesn't take advantage of what it's got (apart from the huge reserves of coal of course

)

what gets me is the amount the government will support the commercial extraction of coal...it would be nice if they help the people...oh yeh, the companies may have to lay off a worker...but why not re-employ them to another industry...we could be the world leader in alternative power...we are in the ideal position, and our industry for that has never got any decent support so far...imagine putting 100 million dollars into r&d for alternative electricity...well thats what will be needed to design a nuclear power station...building it will cost billions....depending on its size...

norm · #54 23-05-2006, 01:49 PM

What also needs to happen with the assistance of the Government is a change of peoples attitude towards power consumption usage. Can we modify our living conditions to use less electrical energy/water etc. Can we get to A to B without a car. Can the local council reduce the number of street lighting, hence reduce the demand for electricity.

This is a global effort on everyones behalf and it needs to start at home.

On the topic of solar power. We had a small terrace house several years ago and installed on it was a Solarhart hot water system. To be honest at best it was pretty average. We would have hot water in summer, no problems, but come winter, at best it was only warm (you could put your hand under the tap and you wouldn't be scolded). After a few checks on the unit, it was deemed working fine, booster settings set to the max. As a result we had to revert to offpeak 2 heating which defeated the cost savings, let alone the environmental savings.
And worse, we couldn't turn offpeak 2 off in summer without incurring a fee for doing so from the Utility company and as such we left it on permanently.

Maybe things have improved 5 yrs ago.

fringe_dweller · #55 23-05-2006, 06:55 PM

re solar power, I find it interesting that with unlimited solar power in the inner solar system in space, when it comes to big beefy missions that require serious ooomph, ie Cassini, planned mission to mars ect. NASA rely on nuke power for the ooomph, not solar.
Norm re your experience with solar hot water - in summer here, the outside water pipes get so hot anyway, we never have to turn the hot tap on anyway

wind, solar - just patchy unreliable bandaid technology, dreamy fiddling at the edges stuff.
and the vast majority of power and water ect. consumption is by industry, commerce, farming and mining.
Not domestic use as everyone seems to believe!

mickoking · #56 23-05-2006, 07:55 PM

We indeed have a backward looking government, A solar cell on every new building is a great idea and it was feasable even as far back as the eighties but no. The great men and women who infest parliament house holds sway to the lobby groups and money men.

Australia used to be tagged the 'clever country' but looking at something like nuclear power with out seriously exploring and investing in viable alternatives is a pretty doubtfull move (to put it lightly).

Having such a small population establishing nuclear power now would cause the price of electricity to rise dramatically, with minimal reduction on green house gasses and the problem of disposing the toxic waste (also very expensive).

I cannot see the advantages of setting up nuclear power in our country. Its a red herring.

mickoking · #57 23-05-2006, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by norm

What also needs to happen with the assistance of the Government is a change of peoples attitude towards power consumption usage. Can we modify our living conditions to use less electrical energy/water etc. Can we get to A to B without a car. Can the local council reduce the number of street lighting, hence reduce the demand for electricity.

This is a global effort on everyones behalf and it needs to start at home.

Spot on

gaa_ian (Ian) · #58 23-05-2006, 08:42 PM

Well speak up people, our Govt. has called for a public debate on this issue.
Make your voice heard where it counts, in the mainstream media.
We can talk about all we want here (and thats good) but if our voices are not heard publicly then there is no driver for change !
Lets see who can get a letter to the editor published & post a copy of it in this thread.
Go on I dare you

mickoking · #59 23-05-2006, 09:10 PM

You are spot on Ian. I am a vetran letter to the editor writer and quite sucsessfull too. But I became jaded by the political climate and stopped doing it a few years ago................BUT this is just the issue to get me fired up again.

Cheers

Mick

mickoking · #60 23-05-2006, 10:35 PM

I submitted an edited version of post 56 to The West Australian news paper. Lets see how we go