|
Nuclear power it's the best. Literally every argument against it is made by the scientifically illiterate who either can't think or simply refuse to because they have a vested interest in something else. Lol anyone who thinks solar/wind are viable alternatives for primary power generation.
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 12:14 |
|
|
chernobyl fukishima your move nuclear power fags
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:11
|
|
|
*insert dozens of traditionally fueled power plant accidents here*
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:13
|
|
|
a hole-y ghost posted:actually coal and nuclear are not dangerous enough. we should totally figure out how to create and contain a self sustaining singularity like in the game space station 13 and draw power from the hawking radiation Isn't that fueled by monkeys? I want to be the guy shoveling monkeys into the engine. But I'll settle for nuclear power.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:34
|
|
|
I grew up near a nuclear plant, and the one side-effect I have experienced is that I enjoy posting on SA ban nuclear power execute all scientists
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:38
|
|
|
mookface posted:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_reactor_accidents_in_the_United_States wikipedia disagrees
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:39
|
|
|
Crazyeyes posted:
During my senior year of EE undergrad, I took a solar energy class. The entire class was about how solar is terrible and could never meet our ever-increasing global energy demands. The class was taught by a guy doing research into photovoltaics and all semester he was discretely trying to plead with us EEs to graduate and please figure something else out or were doomed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:46
|
|
|
BEAR GRYLLZ posted:chernobyl Still less deaths per power produced than pretty much any other alternative.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:47
|
|
|
we need to build gigantic batteries and harvest the solar bounty of the Sahara
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:47
|
|
|
BEAR GRYLLZ posted:chernobyl At Chernobyl, that was a crappy old Soviet reactor, of course it would fail. Plus even then, they had to literally do their best to MAKE it fail. They intentionally disabled cooling and safety features as part of a test and screwed everything up. It was more due to human error than a problem with nuclear power. Even then, it only directly killed 31 people. Also the three remaining Chernobyl reactors still operated for years afterwards, though they're all off now. Also Fukushima was nothing in comparison to Chernobyl
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:47
|
|
|
we must turn satellites into solar wind farms
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:48
|
|
|
Crewmine posted:we need to build gigantic batteries and harvest the solar bounty of the Sahara or we could you know just build some nuclear plants instead and get the same power output for less money.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:48
|
|
|
destroy iceland and transform it into a gigantic geothermal power station
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:49
|
|
|
Crewmine posted:we must turn satellites into solar wind farms japan is actually unironically pursuing this http://www.cbsnews.com/news/japanese-space-agency-hopes-to-harness-solar-power-in-25-years/
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:50
|
|
|
HJE-Cobra posted:At Chernobyl, that was a crappy old Soviet reactor, of course it would fail. Plus even then, they had to literally do their best to MAKE it fail. They intentionally disabled cooling and safety features as part of a test and screwed everything up. It was more due to human error than a problem with nuclear power. heh, yeah right not buying it we're talking about loving NUKES here and you're telling me they're safe? bullshit
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:52
|
|
|
HJE-Cobra posted:At Chernobyl, that was a crappy old Soviet reactor, of course it would fail. Plus even then, they had to literally do their best to MAKE it fail. They intentionally disabled cooling and safety features as part of a test and screwed everything up. It was more due to human error than a problem with nuclear power. Right. Also, Fukushima was the "beyond design basis accident" that we all fear in nuclear power generation. The world has been doing modifications to ensure that there is a backup to the backup power source now. The new AP1000 designs don't even need emergency AC power to shut down safely. I guess we could just start designing for poo poo like meteors hitting containment though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:53
|
|
|
Crewmine posted:we must turn satellites into solar wind farms Dyson sphere bro
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:56
|
|
|
if nuclear waste is a myth let's bury it in op's neighborhood
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 13:58
|
|
|
butplug accident posted:if nuclear waste is a myth let's bury it in op's neighborhood Our spent fuel storage contains over 100 casks of spent fuel, sitting out in the open air, and the fence around the pads receives no dose.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:03
|
|
|
Full Metal Jackass posted:Our spent fuel storage contains over 100 casks of spent fuel, sitting out in the open air, and the fence around the pads receives no dose. that's because radioactive contamination concentrates in many corners and crevices and create hotspots that are serious threats to people’s health
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:07
|
|
|
butplug accident posted:that's because radioactive contamination concentrates in many corners and crevices and create hotspots that are serious threats to people’s health I don't really understand how that's a reply to my post, but there are no contaminations that you're talking about. It's monitored regularly not just remotely but by people going out there and physically walking around the casks and taking readings. Additionally, the heat put off by them is so low that it's cooled by natural air convection. If anything I'd be interested in how they'd keep that natural air cooling with them buried underground.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:13
|
|
|
Remember that article in Science that explained how a coal powered plant releases more radioactive waste into the atmosphere than a Nuclear plant even produces? No, of course you don't, you're probably retarded.
Hobohemian fucked around with this message at 14:19 on Jun 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:15
|
|
|
The popular attitude about nuclear power is generational. For many baby boomers, nuclear power and nuclear war are practically indistinguishable, and while I agree that this is not entirely rational, I didn't live through the Cuban Missile Crisis or any of that poo poo. So yeah, just like everything that's hosed up or broken we can pretty much blame baby boomers and "the greatest generation" lol Also nuclear power plants cost a shitton of money to build and maintain and take a very long time to show only modest profits. If you're in the energy business, it's not the best return of your shareholders' investments, so nobody wants to build new ones.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:22
|
|
|
Full Metal Jackass posted:I don't really understand how that's a reply to my post, but there are no contaminations that you're talking about. It's monitored regularly not just remotely but by people going out there and physically walking around the casks and taking readings. Additionally, the heat put off by them is so low that it's cooled by natural air convection. If anything I'd be interested in how they'd keep that natural air cooling with them buried underground. since most of the current proposals for dealing with highly radioactive nuclear waste involve burying it in deep underground sites, the storage containers, the store itself, or the surrounding rocks will offer little protection to stop radioactivity from escaping into groundwater or air in the longterm. and dont forget that decommissioning nuclear facilities will also create large amounts of radioactive wastes. all the world's nuclear sites will require monitoring and protection for centuries after they are closed down. the solution to these problems is to not create any waste in the first place, by reducing human population levels and limiting the production of gadgets, gizmos, and other useless commodities
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:22
|
|
|
Hesh Ballantine posted:The popular attitude about nuclear power is generational. For many baby boomers, nuclear power and nuclear war are practically indistinguishable, and while I agree that this is not entirely rational, I didn't live through the Cuban Missile Crisis or any of that poo poo. yeah but I think nuclear power should be run as a government monopoly so w/e
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:26
|
|
|
Lawman 0 posted:yeah but I think nuclear power should be run as a government monopoly so w/e "A" government but not this one please, we've been hilariously inept at infrastructure building/maintenance since the 70s basically so in that respect, the anti-nuke crowd is right. butplug accident posted:since most of the current proposals for dealing with highly radioactive nuclear waste involve burying it in deep underground sites, the storage containers, the store itself, or the surrounding rocks will offer little protection to stop radioactivity from escaping into groundwater or air in the longterm. and dont forget that decommissioning nuclear facilities will also create large amounts of radioactive wastes. all the world's nuclear sites will require monitoring and protection for centuries after they are closed down. the solution to these problems is to not create any waste in the first place, by reducing human population levels and limiting the production of gadgets, gizmos, and other useless commodities this is wrong you are wrong and possibly dumb
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:29
|
|
|
Hesh Ballantine posted:"A" government but not this one please, we've been hilariously inept at infrastructure building/maintenance since the 70s basically so in that respect, the anti-nuke crowd is right. Possibly?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:32
|
|
|
Hesh Ballantine posted:"A" government but not this one please, we've been hilariously inept at infrastructure building/maintenance since the 70s basically so in that respect, the anti-nuke crowd is right. you are like those 16th century prelates who looked through galileos telescope and denied what they saw because it could not be true
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:33
|
|
|
I love the idea that people are afraid of nuclear meltdown and places being uninhabitable for 50 years yet surface coal mines are okay and not at all uninhabitable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:34
|
|
|
limitless clean power is probably the worst thing that could happen to us as a species
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:34
|
|
|
Hesh Ballantine posted:"A" government but not this one please, we've been hilariously inept at infrastructure building/maintenance since the 70s basically so in that respect, the anti-nuke crowd is right. I propose that nuclear plants are run by the military - they have experience with nuclear power and we don't have to worry about them being underfunded. The people that run them may be undereducated, tho
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:37
|
|
|
Hesh Ballantine posted:"A" government but not this one please, we've been hilariously inept at infrastructure building/maintenance since the 70s basically so in that respect, the anti-nuke crowd is right. well to be fair, the US looks at the infrastructure situation we are in and then says, "hmm maybe we shouldn't design things for 25 year life cycles cause we clearly cant keep up" and as a result any modification to infrastructure sees a vast improvement in design. Also the government doesn't really keep up maintenance on the reactors themselves. That is up to the power companies and the companies that designed the reactors (most likely GE or Toshiba). Governments only really enforce international regulations regarding the transportation and use of the fuel itself.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:40
|
|
|
Neptr posted:I love the idea that people are afraid of nuclear meltdown and places being uninhabitable for 50 years yet surface coal mines are okay and not at all uninhabitable. you're right, maybe it is better for a black slave to mine for diamonds than coltan. or maybe it's both bad and we should just limit so-called growth and thus solve all the problems at once?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:41
|
|
|
butplug accident posted:you're right, maybe it is better for a black slave to mine for diamonds than coltan. or maybe it's both bad and we should just limit so-called growth and thus solve all the problems at once? Or maybe you can stop being a total retard and open a science book for once in your life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:47
|
|
|
Power generation should be as dangerous as possible. In the utopian society of star trek, everything runs off a power source which can explode the whole ship if the slightest thing goes wrong.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:47
|
|
|
burn all science books and scientists, stop the spread of their profane magicks
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:48
|
|
|
Hell yeah lets produce more highly dangerous waste that we just shove into the ground and forget about to gently caress over future generations!
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:50
|
|
|
"Welp, nuclear power is too dangerous and damaging to humanity, better commit genocide instead." Seriously shut up you loving moron.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:51
|
|
|
mellow, serious looking guy: we will have an energy crisis in 2040 because the world is useing too much electricity reasonable person: why are we using so much power anyway. do we really need all this consumer crap technophile child: i choose reason and rationality, so i support the funding of money vacuums that are really safe because people in robes said so. if you disagree you hate logic and science
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 12:14 |
|
|
butplug accident posted:mellow, serious looking guy: we will have an energy crisis in 2040 because the world is useing too much electricity We get it, you love the idea of a continent of black people living in abject poverty for all eternity. How are white people so dumb?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 14:52
|
|