The Asylum   Search Private Messages Options Blogs Images Chat Cam Portals Calendar FAQ's Join  
Asylum Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.8 Asylum Forums > Polėticās der Mondé > Anyone changed their mind on Nuclear Power ?
Pages (5): [1] 2 3 4 5 »   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread [new thread]    [post reply]
lucidnightmare
Pro Snowflake

Registered: Nov 2003
Location: North Myrtle Beach SC
Posts: 9712
Anyone changed their mind on Nuclear Power ?

???

__________________
Trenchant_Troll
I hope you run out of butter too, Dane.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 02:24 AM
lucidnightmare is offline Click Here to See the Profile for lucidnightmare Click here to Send lucidnightmare a Private Message Find more posts by lucidnightmare Add lucidnightmare to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Trenchant_Troll
ad hominid

Registered: Mar 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 44493

Not me.

__________________
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 02:29 AM
Trenchant_Troll is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Trenchant_Troll Click here to Send Trenchant_Troll a Private Message Find more posts by Trenchant_Troll Add Trenchant_Troll to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
billgerat
Hope-nosis

Registered: Aug 2000
Location: ObamaNation
Posts: 26434

I haven't changed my mind on nuclear power. I have changed my mind on the design of nuclear power plants.

Someone on here was saying the other day that the US hasn't built a reactor in 30-40 years. Guess what - the US government has been building reactors for their Navy ships for decades, right up to the present, and not one of them have had an accident yet.

__________________
"Republicans: the party that brought us 'Just Say No.' First as a drug policy, then as their entire platform." -Stephen Colbert -

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 03:17 AM
billgerat is offline Click Here to See the Profile for billgerat Click here to Send billgerat a Private Message Find more posts by billgerat Add billgerat to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
lucidnightmare
Pro Snowflake

Registered: Nov 2003
Location: North Myrtle Beach SC
Posts: 9712

What about the ones built on fault lines on the west coast ?

__________________
Trenchant_Troll
I hope you run out of butter too, Dane.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 03:27 AM
lucidnightmare is offline Click Here to See the Profile for lucidnightmare Click here to Send lucidnightmare a Private Message Find more posts by lucidnightmare Add lucidnightmare to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Tefl
Reality Theorist

Registered: Aug 2000
Location: Down the rabbit hole
Posts: 8806

quote:
Originally posted by billgerat
the US government has been building reactors for their Navy ships for decades, right up to the present, and not one of them have had an accident yet.


Well, no US Navy nuclear accidents but the Thresher & the Scorpion did sink. The Soviets had numerous nuclear accidents.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 03:30 AM
Tefl is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Tefl Click here to Send Tefl a Private Message Find more posts by Tefl Add Tefl to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Astro74
Dodging the Issues

Registered: Jun 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1145

quote:
Originally posted by Tefl
Well, no US Navy nuclear accidents but the Thresher & the Scorpion did sink. The Soviets had numerous nuclear accidents.


They sank for totally unrelated circumstance and to this day have not leaked radioactive material into the oceans.

Russians have used different designs then American subs that have shown to be unreliable (an example would be a sodium cooled reactor).

__________________
Jesus Loves YOU! It's Just everyone else thinks you're an Asshole!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 03:48 AM
Astro74 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Astro74 Click here to Send Astro74 a Private Message Find more posts by Astro74 Add Astro74 to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Tefl
Reality Theorist

Registered: Aug 2000
Location: Down the rabbit hole
Posts: 8806

I know they didn't sink because of the reactors. But would you eat a fish that had been caught near one of the wrecks?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 04:10 AM
Tefl is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Tefl Click here to Send Tefl a Private Message Find more posts by Tefl Add Tefl to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
RoOsTeR13
Lovable Limey, No Hair

Registered: Aug 2004
Location: US of Fuckin' A!!!!
Posts: 297

In a nutshell..... No


You honestly expect me to change my mind on that issue and jump on board with the building mindset of "No more nuke stations!!!"?

Lets say we jump to that knee jerk and poorly thought out reaction and ban all building of nuclear reactors in the US and petition the world to follow suit. You honestly think China is going to give two shits? How about Russia? Iran?

Lets face it any reactor built over here is going to be built to such stringent standards it will barely make it a worthwhile venture. We have the safest reactors out there. How do you think China's stations stand up? Their reactors are built from bamboo, cheap imitation lego and are held together with pure denial of reality. Any power station in the US is held under almost fanatical scrutiny. China's way of dealing with any institutionally caused disaster is to simply tell everyone looking to fuck off until everyone... fucks off.


I see no benefit to the US running away from nuclear power while nations far less advanced are actually encouraged to build rickety power stations by the same people who hobble our own energy production by crying "3 mile island!!" whenever someone draws plans for a nuclear power station on US soil.

__________________
myeh...

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 04:11 AM
RoOsTeR13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for RoOsTeR13 Click here to Send RoOsTeR13 a Private Message Find more posts by RoOsTeR13 Add RoOsTeR13 to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Astro74
Dodging the Issues

Registered: Jun 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1145

quote:
Originally posted by Tefl
I know they didn't sink because of the reactors. But would you eat a fish that had been caught near one of the wrecks?


I don't eat fish

Yet, knowing that Admiral Rickover drank reactor cooling water in front of Congress, I would not be overaly concerned.

__________________
Jesus Loves YOU! It's Just everyone else thinks you're an Asshole!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 04:16 AM
Astro74 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Astro74 Click here to Send Astro74 a Private Message Find more posts by Astro74 Add Astro74 to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
RoOsTeR13
Lovable Limey, No Hair

Registered: Aug 2004
Location: US of Fuckin' A!!!!
Posts: 297

Plus to use arguments like "Soviets have numerous nuclear accidents" as a reason for us to shy away from nuclear power is like not driving a car because your alcoholic retarded neighbor keeps driving his car into shop windows.

__________________
myeh...

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 04:17 AM
RoOsTeR13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for RoOsTeR13 Click here to Send RoOsTeR13 a Private Message Find more posts by RoOsTeR13 Add RoOsTeR13 to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
lucidnightmare
Pro Snowflake

Registered: Nov 2003
Location: North Myrtle Beach SC
Posts: 9712

It's not that they are not usually safe, it that when it's bad it's really bad and we don't even know how bad it can get. I'm not saying that we should walk away from the idea, just that we need to build these things better and not on fault lines and maybe coasts.

__________________
Trenchant_Troll
I hope you run out of butter too, Dane.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 04:22 AM
lucidnightmare is offline Click Here to See the Profile for lucidnightmare Click here to Send lucidnightmare a Private Message Find more posts by lucidnightmare Add lucidnightmare to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Tefl
Reality Theorist

Registered: Aug 2000
Location: Down the rabbit hole
Posts: 8806

Right. Drank reactor water.

I once watched a girl snort Parmesan cheese and another dude smoke lithium straight from a battery. Just because someone is stupid enough to do something doesn't mean it's save.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 04:29 AM
Tefl is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Tefl Click here to Send Tefl a Private Message Find more posts by Tefl Add Tefl to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
lucidnightmare
Pro Snowflake

Registered: Nov 2003
Location: North Myrtle Beach SC
Posts: 9712

quote:
Originally posted by Astro74
I don't eat fish



Seafood rules !

__________________
Trenchant_Troll
I hope you run out of butter too, Dane.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 04:36 AM
lucidnightmare is offline Click Here to See the Profile for lucidnightmare Click here to Send lucidnightmare a Private Message Find more posts by lucidnightmare Add lucidnightmare to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
SatansLeftHand
buttercup

Registered: Jan 2002
Location: elsewhere
Posts: 5912

You can in fact safely drink reactor water from American plants, as it's literally nothing but water. It might possibly have a slightly higher than usual dose of tritium and deuterium, but again, just water. Sodium-cooled reactors, on the other hand, are insane. Not only do they run very, very hot to begin with, but in the event of a containment breach you have a guaranteed explosion as soon as the coolant hits air.

__________________
(sic)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 04:36 AM
SatansLeftHand is offline Click Here to See the Profile for SatansLeftHand Click here to Send SatansLeftHand a Private Message Find more posts by SatansLeftHand Add SatansLeftHand to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Large Filipino
Fuck me hard in my arse.

Registered: Feb 2004
Location: in colorado somewhere!
Posts: 53090

Japan is going thru another Hiroshima in a sense. Because of it they bounced back hard.
And now they'll bounce back even harder.
Today's technology:


Yes. I watched the whole thing.

__________________

I want a Trump sex doll.
I would throw it in a Orangutan enclosure
And watch the orgy.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 04:37 AM
Large Filipino is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Large Filipino Click here to Send Large Filipino a Private Message Visit Large Filipino's homepage! Find more posts by Large Filipino Add Large Filipino to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
RoOsTeR13
Lovable Limey, No Hair

Registered: Aug 2004
Location: US of Fuckin' A!!!!
Posts: 297

quote:
Originally posted by lucidnightmare
It's not that they are not usually safe, it that when it's bad it's really bad and we don't even know how bad it can get. I'm not saying that we should walk away from the idea, just that we need to build these things better and not on fault lines and maybe coasts.


With you 100% on that.


quote:
Originally posted by Tefl
I once watched a girl snort Parmesan cheese and another dude smoke lithium straight from a battery. Just because someone is stupid enough to do something doesn't mean it's save.



That is all fine and dandy when you are watching drunk attention whores snort cheese or smoke the contents of a battery.
But when somebody is earnestly dispelling ignorance and proving a point by showing how safe something is, i think there is a difference.
Its not as if he was stood in front of congress trying to prove the safety of reactors by using a plutonium rod as a butt plug.

__________________
myeh...

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 04:41 AM
RoOsTeR13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for RoOsTeR13 Click here to Send RoOsTeR13 a Private Message Find more posts by RoOsTeR13 Add RoOsTeR13 to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Astro74
Dodging the Issues

Registered: Jun 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1145

quote:
Originally posted by lucidnightmare
It's not that they are not usually safe, it that when it's bad it's really bad and we don't even know how bad it can get.[/B]


Funny thing, wasn't this one of the main arguments against deep sea oil exploration during/after the gulf oil spill (I know I know, totally different discussion all together)

quote:
I'm not saying that we should walk away from the idea, just that we need to build these things better and not on fault lines and maybe coasts.


The big problem here is, these power plants need to be located next to a good water source. In Japan's case, being an island nation means the best water source is located on the shoreline. They are screwed since they do not have bountiful natural resources and being located near a fault line adds a new additional level of fun.

__________________
Jesus Loves YOU! It's Just everyone else thinks you're an Asshole!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 05:04 AM
Astro74 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Astro74 Click here to Send Astro74 a Private Message Find more posts by Astro74 Add Astro74 to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Astro74
Dodging the Issues

Registered: Jun 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1145

quote:
Originally posted by Tefl
Right. Drank reactor water.



In naval applications, the reactors are cooled with pressurized water that is contained within a closed loop system. The water itself never actually comes into contact with the contents of the reactor. The reactor is cooled via heat transfer from the reactor compartment to the water pipes.

What Admiral Rickover did was to prove a point to the Congressional panel that nuclear power is not this evil boogeyman. He is the reason why the US has not ever had a reactor incident on one of its vessels. All he did was basically ingest the same amount of radiation that the average sunbather gets, while at the beach for the day.

__________________
Jesus Loves YOU! It's Just everyone else thinks you're an Asshole!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 05:19 AM
Astro74 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Astro74 Click here to Send Astro74 a Private Message Find more posts by Astro74 Add Astro74 to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Pinecrika
Muffer's He-beast

Registered: Jul 2001
Location: Aotearoa
Posts: 19810

Nuclear isn't the problem, its waste disposal thats the big issue.

__________________
"Let Ebola decide. " ....Tuba

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 09:27 AM
Pinecrika is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Pinecrika Click here to Send Pinecrika a Private Message Find more posts by Pinecrika Add Pinecrika to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Coincidence
Counterfeit

Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Sun
Posts: 32930

Again, I changed my mind when I saw that doc 'Chernobyl Reclaimed'
http://www.offthefence.com/content/programme.php?ID=449

"What would happen if the world were suddenly without people; if humans vanished off the face of the earth? How would nature react - and how swiftly?

On the edge of Europe, a deserted location reveals the surprising answer. An abandoned village can change in a very short time into a sanctuary for plants, birds and animals. Shy and rare species, some thought to be on the brink of extinction are found in robust good health.

This film unmasks the surprising faces of the new inhabitants. In houses where people once lived and laughed, unexpected wildlife is making itself at home. The adventures of a likeable cast of non-human characters give viewers a rare glimpse into an alternative world. Here wild animals face challenges in an environment totally outside their experience, while once-domestic species must rediscover their wild natures within.

Chernobyl. Deserted by people after the worst nuclear disaster in history and now reclaimed by a remarkable collection of wildlife and the descendents of pets that were left in the city when the people went away."

__________________
You're in the wrnght place.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 11:54 AM
Coincidence is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Coincidence Click here to Send Coincidence a Private Message Visit Coincidence's homepage! Find more posts by Coincidence Add Coincidence to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Coincidence
Counterfeit

Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Sun
Posts: 32930

Beyond that, the discussion is stupid. Every fucking day tells us that we need to switch to natural, harmless energy, and generally use less power.
The first days of these disasters were filled with overbearing fucks patting worried people on the cheek going 'oh, you poor frightened people this isn't dangerous at all. Look at this web page'.
Don't fall into the trap of supporting a potentially extremely dangerous technology just because it's somehow cool and 'rational' to do it.

__________________
You're in the wrnght place.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 12:40 PM
Coincidence is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Coincidence Click here to Send Coincidence a Private Message Visit Coincidence's homepage! Find more posts by Coincidence Add Coincidence to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
RoOsTeR13
Lovable Limey, No Hair

Registered: Aug 2004
Location: US of Fuckin' A!!!!
Posts: 297

Hey i'm with you all the way with finding an energy source that is renewable, harmless and abundant. The spanner in the works with that idea is that there isn't one. Wind is not even nearly cost effective and requires massive subsidies to operate. Solar is a waste of time on a large scale. We have hydroelectric power and that is fine and dandy but it is locked to certain locations and those are definitely finite.

I am all for finding a good clean effective and renewable source of energy. Personally i think if we should take the billions we waste in subsidising ineffective sources of energy and put them into a single lump sum that would be given, tax free to the entity or person who is able to invent a PROVEN clean, renewable, effective and CHEAP energy source that would not require any subsidization to operate.

The point that we should use 'less power' is frankly, massively naive. In fact it is worthy of coming from a child. We live in a growing world and as more countries and communities expand and as our needs grow we demand more and more power. That is a harsh reality. Turning your light bulbs off and using less hot water may help your wallet a bit but in the overall scheme of things it is a drop in the ocean.

__________________
myeh...

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 02:58 PM
RoOsTeR13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for RoOsTeR13 Click here to Send RoOsTeR13 a Private Message Find more posts by RoOsTeR13 Add RoOsTeR13 to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
SatansLeftHand
buttercup

Registered: Jan 2002
Location: elsewhere
Posts: 5912

I say we figure out a way to make highly reliable microwave lasers and orbital power reception stations. Not to put power satellites in orbit, no. To receive the power being beamed outward from the photovoltaic cells we completely cover the entire surface of Mercury with.

__________________
(sic)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 03:13 PM
SatansLeftHand is offline Click Here to See the Profile for SatansLeftHand Click here to Send SatansLeftHand a Private Message Find more posts by SatansLeftHand Add SatansLeftHand to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Coincidence
Counterfeit

Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Sun
Posts: 32930

quote:
Originally posted by RoOsTeR13
Hey i'm with you all the way with finding an energy source that is renewable, harmless and abundant. The spanner in the works with that idea is that there isn't one. Wind is not even nearly cost effective and requires massive subsidies to operate. Solar is a waste of time on a large scale. We have hydroelectric power and that is fine and dandy but it is locked to certain locations and those are definitely finite.

I am all for finding a good clean effective and renewable source of energy. Personally i think if we should take the billions we waste in subsidising ineffective sources of energy and put them into a single lump sum that would be given, tax free to the entity or person who is able to invent a PROVEN clean, renewable, effective and CHEAP energy source that would not require any subsidization to operate.

The point that we should use 'less power' is frankly, massively naive. In fact it is worthy of coming from a child. We live in a growing world and as more countries and communities expand and as our needs grow we demand more and more power. That is a harsh reality. Turning your light bulbs off and using less hot water may help your wallet a bit but in the overall scheme of things it is a drop in the ocean.


Get out of the seventies, please. It is obvious that you have some interest in the status quo (probably aircondition) that pollutes your ability to reflect honestly upon energy usage.
Also, you call yourself a conservative, right? Energy conservation is a crime to you guys. You can probably all be found in the top 10% of energy wasting individuals on this planet.

__________________
You're in the wrnght place.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 03:39 PM
Coincidence is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Coincidence Click here to Send Coincidence a Private Message Visit Coincidence's homepage! Find more posts by Coincidence Add Coincidence to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
RoOsTeR13
Lovable Limey, No Hair

Registered: Aug 2004
Location: US of Fuckin' A!!!!
Posts: 297

so other than spitting out broad generalisations and blindly making huge stereotypical assumtions your point is what? Or did you simply feel the need to look down your nose and name call?

Tell you what, when you can move beyond the 'conservative bad, progressive good' bullshit and get down to dealing with facts or actual ideas that don't revolve around belching out the same old tired stereotypes we can talk.

Until then go use that nonsense elsewhere.

__________________
myeh...

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 03-17-2011 04:04 PM
RoOsTeR13 is offline Click Here to See the Profile for RoOsTeR13 Click here to Send RoOsTeR13 a Private Message Find more posts by RoOsTeR13 Add RoOsTeR13 to your buddy list [P] Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:32 PM. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Pages (5): [1] 2 3 4 5 »   Last Thread   Next Thread
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread

Forum Jump:
 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
 

< Contact Us - The Asylum >

Copyright © 2014- Imaginet Inc.
[Legal Notice] | [Privacy Policy] | [Site Index]