The Nuke Scare

You know how many have been panicking about Japan’s reactors, and will probably want to shut down ours? I found this article which I thought was interesting…describes why the newer reactors are much safer:

The Nuke Scare

To imply that the Fukushima accidents are representative of current developments in nuclear power is similar to claiming that car safety has remained unchanged since the Model A.

Makes me feel better…after all, gas prices are going up for us. I don’t want electricity bills to follow that pattern. :wink:

Not mine (this is an international forum) :stuck_out_tongue:

Quick! buy all the anti-radiation pills you can find… Nuts! They should be sending those $$ to the people that will need it.

YouTube - Americans Racing to Buy Anti - radiation Pills

Try this:

Most sensible thing I have read about this incident.

Thank you for posting that. :-TU :-TU Great article…I shall now travel to any scaremongering sites I find and post it. :stuck_out_tongue:

Some people will always object to logical choises. Personally I like nuklear power, It makes me think of green stuff glowing. Very cool. Those suggesting that we drop it should invent an option, wind power is not since it kills innocent birds (birds with families and friends) building windpower is not only a bad choise from an economic standpoint but its also a killing machine.

Glad you liked it, it’s one to shove into the ‘silly crowds’ ’ faces.

I fail to see how properly positioned wind power generators are bad choices when the initial investment is repaid in perpetuity via a source of power that will always be there.

Windpower takes a large area just to simply produce a tiny amount, why not give that room to animals and build a nuklearpower plant instead, resulting in more room for lovley animals and us?

Where you build windpower, you kill birds and other animals. So why not simply go for nuklearplants right away? Windpower can’t be placed everywhere either, usually resulting in a lot of digging and cables just to get a really tiny ammount of energy. People hate living close to windpower, how does one place windpower well, its getting away for ships, animals and humans wherever you place it.

Wind turbines don’t have to be those big propeller thingies.
Horizontal ‘helix’ wind turbines can be installed on top of any building (even private homes)

Also, the sea is a perfect perpetual motion machine; motion = energy; we just have to harness it.

I like this idea…

or this…

Many of those ideas seem great. But often these “green” experiments don’t always work as well as hoped.

They might cause visual problems, get in the way of boats and ships, kill some wildlife, get ruined in storms/hurricanes, etc.

I’d prefer to stick with nuclear power…I think it is more convenient than most of those solutions, and usually not dangerous. If we could only upgrade our current older ones…

But America and others are in economic difficulties, to say the least (ha, I could give a lot of evidence, but it is too real to be posted here :P).

You did not address my point.

I stated that properly positioned wind power generators are a great investment over the longterm.

You are correct that you need many of them, however, I do not buy your argument that they will take up room on animals. Refer back to my “properly positioned” comment for that.

You make a big fuss over bird strikes, and they are unfortunate. There is no clamour to ground flights the world over due to the daily bird strikes at airports and in the air. If ‘will somebody please think of the birds’ is the best offence against wind energy then that is a weak hand.

Now, before this becomes a big pissing contest, I want to clarify something that I did not make clear in my initial statement: wind power is mainly ideal for countries/states with large coastlines and I would argue against large scale usage in landlocked/limited coastline countries.

Using the criteria above, developed and developing nations need to move as the circumstances dictate to nuclear, wind, solar, hydro-electric, geothermal and away from fossil fuels & oil.

However, the oil lobby is strong and it is hard to make older people understand that the fossil fuels they covet are non-renewable.

the ultimate power source is nuclear fusion, exactly what the sun does. If we could harness the power of a star here on earth by making our own star, think tiny, it would produce so much energy it could power a city.

You asked for it, here it is:

500 Trillion Watt Laser ;D ;D

Will come online this year, to try and make Nuclear Fusion Happen, 500 Times the energy of the US power grid :slight_smile:

sweet can’t wait, this is what we need. We really need it, we need to harness the power of the stars to advance our civilization, to be able to travel between the stars, we need to more then people can imagine.

At the moment it’s just science fiction. Before people will be really able to travel in space runs much of the time. Greetings.
And all of this is just !ot!

Ha! :smiley: You mean Laser Watt or Laser"Wraith" ? The latter has more energy than required if used for the right purpose

Anyway as you know - there is an alternative that we (they?) can use instead of uranium - thorium

Nahhh! Let’ user LaserGhost instead - that would be enough at least for substituting all A2 batteries in all respective devices ;D Cheers !

:P0l Guy’s can we keep this friendly and on topic instead of on “a specific” user! :P0l

It was friendly, Ronny
Basically please concentrate on “thorium”
Cheers! “You can leave your hat on” :smiley:

:-TU :-TU :-TU :stuck_out_tongue:

Okay, I’ll power it, you go in the center. :stuck_out_tongue:

Some perspective: http://xkcd.com/radiation/