|
I was at a Democratic platform meeting last night and this older lady used her speaking time to rant about nuclear power. Then she got back in line, waited patiently, and gave another three minute anti-nuclear rant. I don't get how someone can be pro-science and anti-nuclear at the same time.
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 12:35 |
|
|
Corky Romanovsky posted:It's night time and the local renewable power storage has already been depleted, turning on my monitor would spool up a coal fire and accelerate climate change. Hilariously, coal plants output more environmental radiation than nuclear power does, because coal contains trace amounts of radioactive isotopes and burning it purifies it then releases the isotopes into the air. Nuclear power keeps all of its radiation inside the plant. The real threat from nuclear power is the damage to local ecosystems because of the enormous amount of water nuclear generation uses and the thermal waste from all the warm water being pumped back into whatever water source feeds it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Hodgepodge posted:japan has a distinct problem in that they can't really just built on the mainland because korea and china hate them They cut corners on the seawall and only designed it to withstand the most likely tsunami. Its not unlike what happened to New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina. Corky Romanovsky posted:Depends on their reasoning. If they just say "atoms are scary", that isn't really science. Her entire argument amounted to 'atoms are scary' and also 'terrorists will get hold of our atoms!'. whomupclicklike posted:It's not contrary to be pro science and anti nuclear Nuclear energy is the best and cleanest of any presently viable location independent large scale electrical generation.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 09:40
|
|
|
Why do we leave power generation and other utilities to the free market? Power and the infrastructure to support it is a good example of a public good that should be heavily managed by a government entity. Well, I mean I know *why* we leave it to market forces - people who were rich and wanted to get *more* rich argued that we should and no one with any significant power argued the other way - but I don't know why people continue to think thats a good and cool thing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:so what is your idea here, that taxes pay for energy generation? who is going to shoulder those taxes, because like every other tax it sure won't be the rich Well, the poor *already* pay for power generation, so this seems like an excuse to do nothing? If power companies are already beholden to the state why not just take the extra step and make the state directly responsible so we know who to blame and demand action from?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
crazy cloud posted:i'd like to die of radiation-related illness after the local nuclear power plant goes chernobyl because all the homer simpson rear end STEM fratboys at the plant were too hungover from the office christmas party the night before and were too hungover to prevent it. at least, I will say with my last breath and an ear-to-ear satisfied grin, everyone was able to fully charge their iphone anytime they wanted Your body is being filled with radio waves from cellphones, wi-fi, and radios on a constant basis. The only protection is to wrap your head, and any other part of your body you want to keep safe from the deadly radiation, in tin foil and coat your walls with a lead based paint. Also turn *off* your monitor, because its filling you with electrons at this very moment. Stay safe luddite ghost
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
crazy cloud posted:this is projection, you'd like to attack me for being electron-averse to allow yourself to redirect away from your own electron-dependency I am projecting so hard... on my home theater system! rudatron posted:Show me on the doll where the atoms touched you The atoms are inside you right now
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
Maybe you're just too reliant on electricity to live as Nature intended, says man on an internet forum
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 23:08
|
|
|
crazy cloud posted:Kaczynski had some good ideas So did that kid from Into the Wild
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 00:36
|
|
|
whomupclicklike posted:Wait one follow up question I have is what do we do about nuclear waste Stick in a mountain where it will happily reside forever, bury it somewhere relatively geologically inactive, dump it in the ocean because a few meters of seawater is a pretty good insulator. Most of the irradiated waste from reactors isn't nearly as dangerous as the anti-nuclear people would have you believe. Again, the tailings from coal power are significantly more of an environmental hazard than the waste from a reactor. Nebakenezzer posted:That kid from Into the wild walked into a wilderness without any supplies save a sack of rice and the only information he had was a (incorrect) card he had stolen from a library 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
whomupclicklike posted:How can the waste be recycled? What is it used for? Its kinda like burning coal, capturing all the soot from the coal and compressing that into new coal blocks, then burning the coal again. It can be expensive and time consuming, but you basically extract another 10x the power from uranium as you got out of the first pass. People get scared though because a potential by product of reprocessing uranium is plutonium, which is the stuff you make nuclear weapons with.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
whomupclicklike posted:But what happens after those reactions? Is there still waste? Thanks for actually explaining this I really appreciate it Eventually you get down to stuff thats not worth the cost of dealing with anymore. Its still radioactive and needs to be contained, but theoretically we might want to someday dig up that waste and reprocess it when it is economically worthwhile. Reprocessing gets rid of a lot of the high energy stuff by turning it back into more fuel, but you're always going to have radioactive waste from bits of machinery that were in the reactor or whatever. That stuff still has to be dealt with so you never really eliminate all nuclear waste or even the bulk of it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 03:54
|
|
|
brugroffil posted:They are able to do this thanks to very expensive upgrades that sometimes go horribly wrong and break the entire plant, like when SONGS replaced their steam generators with new ones that had a critical design flaw, leading to both reactors being permanently shuttered. Or when Crystal River thought "hey, we can save $20m on this steam generator project by running it ourselves instead of hiring the one company that's done dozens of them around the country!" and promptly broke their containment building twice. Collectively, that flushed over $10B worth of assets down the drain. The industry as a whole had to spend over $1B on Fukashima upgrades. Similar numbers were spent on post-9/11 security upgrades. I used to drive past the boobs every weekend when I lived in California 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 01:00
|
|
|
I saw some study about squeezing coal in your hands so hard that it turns into diamonds. Also had some pioneering research into temporal mechanics
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 12:35 |
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:That's true I demand we do something about this solar menace. I don't trust atoms running around loose!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2017 03:08
|
|