Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Cockmaster
Feb 24, 2002

ExplodingSims posted:

Solar panels on building don't really generate enough power to offset the cost of them for the most part. You can basically run the lights, but any high power stuff, like the A/C system is still going to need to be run off the grid.

Maybe not for a multi-story office complex, but it'd be cool to run the numbers for something like Wal-Mart or Home Depot.

Even if it couldn't completely replace grid power, I'd imagine it'd make a pretty big dent in demand.


Nessus posted:

It depends what you mean by "nearly eternal." A lot of dangerous nuclear waste will be very dangerous for a long time. There are steps that can reduce that risk, some of which involve "using it as fuel again" since the radioactive poo poo actually makes good reactor fuel. It involves a lot of plutonium which people could extract for nuclear bombs, however, which evidently presents a fundamental risk of some kind, possibly in case someone decides to steal it? I was never clear on this, but "proliferation risk" is usually cited when that factoid comes up.

It also depends how much of a risk you're willing to take, to some extent.

This isn't to say that radiation or heavy metals are "good," but it's not like "pollutants, dangerous wastes, and so forth" are somehow unique to the nuclear power industry. I think sometimes every cost is toted up for nuclear power, while many of the costs of coal/natural gas are just sort of ignored, since we'll clearly all be running on solar/wind/biomass/living like medieval peasants again Real Soon Now, so they don't matter.

There's also thorium, which is both way more common than uranium and basically useless for producing weapons-grade material.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

  • Locked thread