Nuke Plants.....love 'em...leave 'em ??

[twich54]

With the disaster over in Japan, I'm wondering what folks reaction / feelings are to nuclear power generation here in this country ?

Myself I believe in a balanced generation of power and the development of said sources that will in the long run have the least amount of enviromental impact. Now with that being said I suspect everybody would feel the same......so it comes down to the known the unknown and the hopefull execution / generation along the correct path !

I have very vivid memories of 3/28/79, seeing that I live between Three Mile Island and Limerick. With that being said I still remain pro-nuclear

 

[amey01]

Funny, because here in Australia, while we have nuclear reactors in the centre of Sydney, we remain very wary of nuclear for power generation.

I guess it helps having almost limitless supplies of coal. But be that as it may, we also have almost limitless supplies of uranium.

I believe that nuclear generation is a must for the future way forward. The reason for this is that we have become so dependent on electricity. We need it for transport, manufacturing, refrigeration, water pumping, communication, etc. So much so, that if it were not present we'd all be dead within about 2 weeks at a guess. Extraordinary world population growth has exasperated the issue.

So we therefore require cheap, efficient and reliable methods of generation. Nuclear provides us with that. We can't keep digging up coal and burning it forever. And I'm afraid a friggin' solar panel or wind farm doesn't provide us with a practical or financially feasible solution to our needs (that's right - needs, not wants).

As for what's happened in Japan, yes it's scary. And yes, it's a setback. But we should learn from this and put measures in place to ensure a similar accident doesn't happen ever again, anywhere in the world. But certainly not abandon all the progress we have made in the last 100 years.

Imagine if we had abandoned the dream of air travel the minute the first airliner crashed?

So yes, I remain pro-nuclear too. We need to learn from this mistake and move on. And with further development and learning, we can make it even safer.

 

[Len44]

1. I think "Balanced" is a terrific word...and concept.

2. Let's learn the lesson, and NOT build in earthquake-prone areas.

3. Rigorous safety / maintenance inspections

4. NIMBY!!! :devil: (Thanks Twich)

 

[twich54]

4. NIBY!!! :devil:

Len, do you mean NIMBY....Not In My Back Yard ?

 

[Hocky]

I think that we really NEED nuclear power.

 

[Rich]

Our energy budget is not much different in concept than our financial budget. We tend to have a greater appetite for consumption than is necessary. I am all for sustainable energy production, and nuclear power can be one of many ways we accomplish that. But we must make the hard decisions, strictly regulate location, manufacturing, and maintenance of nuclear facilities, and find a permanent solution for storage of nuclear waste.

I wish we would put as much money and effort into developing solar and wind power, and into energy conservation (the real key to this issue), as we have put into nuclear and hydroelectric power.

 

[Satch]

If Wall Street is willing to put up the capitol for new nuke plants, fine. They won't.

A more efficient power grid (jobs). More efficient houses and buildings, incentives for training and job programs for installing insulation and other energy saving projects (jobs). More wind, solar and other new types of energy production. (jobs that can't be outsourced).

Make it easier (tax breaks) for home owners to install solar panels and be able to sell back excess energy to the power company.

Reward innovation.

Phase out the old nuclear plants that have outlived their intended lifespan and for crying out loud, Don't re-license those old plants to run at 110% capacity!

 

[twich54]

We tend to have a greater appetite for consumption than is necessary.

Rich, not likely to change anytime soon......btw, did I hear correctly....one can no longer purchase a 100 watt bulb in the state of Ca ?

find a permanent solution for storage of nuclear waste.

did not the French come up with a way of re-cycling spent rods ??

I wish we would put as much money and effort into developing solar and wind power, and into energy conservation (the real key to this issue), as we have put into nuclear and hydroelectric power.

FWIW, we have had quite a bit of 'wind activity' hear in Pa and NY as of late, yet even with that all the damn NIMBY's keep popping up where ever you go !

 

[Bernard]

FWIW, we have had quite a bit of 'wind activity' hear in Pa and NY as of late, yet even with that all the damn NIMBY's keep popping up where ever you go !

Yeah, isn't everyone going to say nuclear plants are fine, but NIMBY? I do have one in my back yard

I read that nuclear power was used to deliver only 24% of Japan's electricity needs. In view of what has happened, would it not make sense to shut down those plants and rely more on hydro power, seeing as they are surrounded by water?

FWIW Italy shut down all of their nuclear plants after Chernobyl, not that it will do them much good, surrounded as they are by plants in nearby countries.

 

[amey01]

Rich, not likely to change anytime soon......btw, did I hear correctly....one can no longer purchase a 100 watt bulb in the state of Ca ?

Well, it's true anywhere in Australia. For standard lighting, you can not purchase any traditional incandescent light globe. Banned, gone. Those horrid, harsh, flickering compact fluoros are what they are pushing, but if you look hard you can find halogen incandescents, at about 5x the price of a normal light globe!

Luckily my house has 12v halogens - but the writing is no doubt on the wall for those some time in the future. I'll have to stock up!

yet even with that all the damn NIMBY's keep popping up where ever you go

I'm not ashamed to say NIMBY for a nuke plant. Of course I don't want a nuke plant in my back yard........no more than I want a coal plant in my back yard!!

 

[Satch]

U.S. Energy Policy

Go f**k yourself

 

[JMAUSGP]

The only problem I have with Nuclear Power is the risk of a complete meltdown.

Japanese thought the risk was small and maybe it was. But sooner or later odds catch up and something man or nature does can cause something major to go wrong and unfortunately a total reactor meltdown is a bill that no one can actually pay....at least not in this century.

Last night a Physicist was on Letterman and he said that if the Japenese reactors did meltdown, it would poison the groundwater and eventually the ocean for hundreds of miles for over a 100 years. Northern Japan would become a dead zone.

Then Letterman asked well what would happen if the Nuclear plant in New York, built on the Hudson which is also built on two fault lines, I think they called it Turkey point, he asked what would happen if that one had a meltdown. The Physicist said it would single handedly bring down the US economy and New York city would have to be evacuated like a ghost town........okay, if they couldn't evacuate NYC that wouldn't be such a bad thing

I guess my point is unless you can get the risk to zero, then Nuclear is just too risky, at least because of the catastrophic cost if and when something does go wrong.

 

[JMAUSGP]

did not the French come up with a way of re-cycling spent rods ??

They turn them in to Renaults and export them as green cars, at least they glow green

 

[twich54]

The only problem I have with Nuclear Power is the risk of a complete meltdown.

how many times has that happened with respect to lives lost vs. lives lost (in the years of nuclear power) in the arena of fosil fuel generation.....??

Japanese thought the risk was small and maybe it was. But sooner or later odds catch up and something man or nature does can cause something major to go wrong

There in lies the reason why Las Vegas exists

........okay, if they couldn't evacuate NYC that wouldn't be such a bad thing.

go and take a poll of all the 'Upstate NY'ers' that have supported that 'welfare state' for generation upon generation, granted there are many credible individuals living there but there is a large number of deadbeats as in any urban enviroment in this country.......I digress.....another topic for another discussion...at another time.

 

[User211]

War time? Bomb the nukes. No one ever seems to talk about this. Forget Pearl Harbour - this is a lot worse, IMHO.

Electric cars? More nukes.

 

[Len44]

I wish we would put as much money and effort into developing solar and wind power, and into energy conservation (the real key to this issue), as we have put into nuclear and hydroelectric power.

I strongly agree, but there does not seem to be sufficient emphasis or incentives ($$$$$) for energy conservation.

 

[Bernard]

how many times has that happened with respect to lives lost vs. lives lost (in the years of nuclear power) in the arena of fosil fuel generation.....?? .

Dave, I don't know the stats, but stats are just stats until they happen in your back yard to friends and neighbours (Chernobyl is a world away).

We cannot just ask how many times a complete meltdown has occurred. We have to consider the potential impacts of a meltdown. California is experiencing the impacts of what happened an ocean away.

I'm with Joe on this one.

 

[Gordon Gray]

I strongly agree, but there does not seem to be sufficient emphasis or incentives ($$$$$) for energy conservation.

With the Republicans, via proposed funding cuts, apparently trying to strip the EPA of its ability to monitor air and water pollution, including green house gases, what kind of message does that send regarding incentives for energy conservation?

GG

 

[Rich]

Those darn Socialists over in Europe . . . what are they thinking?:

Germany set to abandon nuclear power for good

 

[twich54]

Those darn Socialists over in Europe . . . what are they thinking?:

******* !!!!!..........