Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Panasonic camera business restructuring ...
Yeah, but on Mars you can experience other surprises... 


Buy a Tesla, the number is underneath the battery storage  Big Grin with a voucher for a free spinach smoothie for your flight to Mars. Tempted?

Quote:Tell that the people suffering from leukemia because of nuclear powerstations or "recycling plants", rotten like Sellafield, closeby.


It's always easy to vote for nuclear energy if there are no own kids involved and your no neighbour to it. I don't wnat to convince you against whatever. You just should bear in mind that your time horizon is quite limited and if it were only you to decide, you would fuck up with the future of a lot of generations. Actually I don't want this to happen to me, so I cannot dare to do that for coming generations. Stopping a coal powerstation: few decades afterwards the ebvironment is green again. Stopping a nuclear powerstation: Centuries of radiation, hektatons of radiating waste.


Do you know more than this one planet to live on? Not guessing, knowing and be able to travel to.  Wink

If the climate change scenarios get real - and this is likely - nuclear waste is the very least of our problems.


But yeah, we'll not agree here.
Nuclear power plants with uranium always were a very stupid idea. The things you need to do to keep it under control, and all the things that can (and will eventually) go wrong is mind boggling.

The silliest thing is that safe nuclear power is easily possible (using thorium power plants instead of uranium), but has not been realized due to corporate games and lobbies.

And the sun and wind are always there. So yes, current nuclear energy is a stupid idea, and we indeed need to get off fossil fuels.
Agreed.  Nuclear has to evolve. China (and this is where it counts the most) is planning to have its first Thorium reactors ready in the 30s.

The problem with wind/solar can be seen below (Germany - requires 60GW at the moment). Hydro backup is available for approx. 4h. The rest has to come from natural gas (without nuclear) which is not a solution IMHO.

[Image: 17239793_1259566230786621_30850049947524...e=596564AA]

What has to also be done is to store wind/solar/hydro energy. Not in batteries but in hydrogen. You use the surplus of wind/solar/hydro electricity during their "peak hours" to make hydrogen and oxygen from water, to use as fuel when needed. Not that hard.
Yes, but hydrogen conversion is still subject to research - especially at industrial scale. And you will need A LOT of overcapacity for that. No impossible though.

Well, that calculation you can make every day. The risk of getting killed in a car accident is also higher than to get polluted by radiation or suffer of extinction. Or dying by a heart attack.


But why have radiation to be added to the risk list? Playing the cool one and listing all the things you gonna be killed before something else in theory could happen - doesn't matter if against all odds something else DOES happen.


I recall very well the argumentation of the "pro nuclear energy" people. Coming up with statistics how likely an accident will happen in a nuclear power plant, haha, once in a century. This rate already is filled for a millenium after not even 50 years of active power generation... dozens of serious accidents, hundreds or other critical incidents like Sellafield, Chernobyl, Fukushima, Three Mile Island, even in Switzerland the very first test-reactor was close to core melt down which is not very present in  minds. Sorry, but I'm gettin g a bit aggresive if people start to play with others health in big scale. Fessenheim in Alsace is already off thr grid because of too high risks - it didn't last 50 years!


Nuclear, as we know it, can't evolve. The risk remains and you're simply not capable to take responsibility. Nobody is! Stop bullshitting around. Not my problem that your health risk increased by dying of skin cancer because the missing ozone layer in Australia. This planet is too crowded to play with potential nuclear threats, possibilities of terrorism increased 


Anyway, let's close this thread now. We'll not agree on this nor decide all that anyway.


Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)