[QUOTE=The DooD;30134552]I assume they're just going back to fossil fuel power plants. Either that or they have some diabolical evil plan up their sleeve, or a power crystal that they can plug into their power grid.[/QUOTE]
They won't try and replace them with other forms of energy production, they actually want to use less energy by making their government building less energy consuming etc. They want to use as much less energy as these power plants produce.
i really think the chancellor is an idiot
[QUOTE=DrBreen;30137447]i really think the chancellor is an idiot[/QUOTE]
Well no shit, a [del]physician[/del] physicist should now this shit
The Netherlands might get a new power plant by 2022 :v:
[QUOTE=glennman94;30137908]The Netherlands might get a new power plant by 2022 :v:[/QUOTE]
We better fucking not.
It's their loss.
If this:
[url]http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1091384-Kirk-Sorensen-Has-Started-a-Thorium-Power-Company[/url]
Goes well, by 2022 we should have thorium reactors available.
Meanwhile in Poland
[URL]http://www.thenews.pl/9/7/Artykul/24640,Polish-parliament-clear-ways-for-nuclear-plant[/URL]
[quote]
MPs have voted overwhelmingly in favour of new laws allowing for the construction of nuclear plants on Polish soil.
Today's votes in the Sejm (lower house) follow on from the selection of Zarnowiec, northern Poland, as the site of Poland's first nuclear facility, as chosen by the Ministry of Economy in March 2010.
Today's votes concerned two amendments. The first allows the operator to have greater flexibility in determining the amounts ear-marked for the fund that deals with waste management. The second removes the requirement for investors to prove that they have the entire funds at their disposal from the outset, allowing for projects to be fulfilled in stages.
In the first case, some 404 MPs voted in favour, with just two against and one abstention. Regarding the second amendment, one was against and five MPs abstained.
An international tender will be announced in July, searching for a company that can provide technical expertise in the construction of the plant at Zarnowiec.
U.S. concern Westinghouse has been reported as being amongst those keen to secure the commission.
Zarnowiec was already ear-marked for a similar project during the Communist era, but plans were shelved following the Chernobyl disaster and the subsequent collapse of the Iron Curtain in 1989. [/quote]
will rammstein be okay
Let me get this straight.
They whine, moan and complain about the so-called dangers of nuclear power (which is pretty safe if you aren't an IDIOT/corrupt about it), one of the cleanest, most efficient sources of energy around... then do the same thing when other energy sources which produce [I]more[/I] CO2 need to step up and do what work a missing nuclear plant would have otherwise done?
Funny thing is, they said back in 2008 that they'd abolish nuclear power in 2014, but it didn't happen.
Germany just got dumb
How [img]http://www.facepunch.com/fp/ratings/box.png[/img]
Nuclear Power is getting more safe by the day, especially since Fukushima.
Is it just me or does Germany have a history of being ruled by ideological idiots?
Jesus christ guys cut with the emotional posts, there's always a reason for something, go find it. It's never as simple as "hurr gemrany iz dum". The Germans themselves are posting a few reasons. Outside of Germany, you'll be unlikely to know anything about this proposal and its reasons.
I'm all for nuclear power. Fuck fossil fuel.
[QUOTE=Anteep2;30139788]Jesus christ guys cut with the emotional posts, there's always a reason for something, go find it. It's never as simple as "hurr gemrany iz dum". The Germans themselves are posting a few reasons. Outside of Germany, you'll be unlikely to know anything about this proposal and its reasons.[/QUOTE]
We do this for every other country, why should Germany be any different?
My hat goes off to you, Germany
[QUOTE=Pleather;30140136]My hat goes off to you, Germany[/QUOTE]
Your head will too
The radioactive waste is used for our super secret weapons
I read:
"Germany Pledges to reenter the dark ages by 2022"
Because lets not forget. Nuclear power includes Fusion and Thorium based Fission. Two Obviously awesome sources of safer nuclear power.
[QUOTE=Marik Bentusi;30136495]Ahahaha.
Guys, I'm from Germany, there's no way they will actually stick to this plan. There have been similar plans before and not too long ago they extended the deadline again. This new date is treated like a huge step in a new direction, but really, it's just an old contract more generous than the old one.
The current government is "pretty close" to the economy, they wouldn't cut their own donation sources like that. So far they've always found a loophole to defuse such plans after racking in poll popularity and if I trust my government with anything, it's coming up with such loopholes and executing them when nobody gives a damn anymore.
This is just a reflex from Fukushima combined with the fact we have notoriously bad nuclear waste deposits. That's (believed to be) a much bigger threat than spontaneous reactor combustion, tho some power plants have cheated tests so they wouldn't have to pay for repairs overdue since long.
We're using old mining caves with horrible conditions and the barrels are treated like toys. Everyone's afraid of that shit leaking into the ground water.
But anyway, no way they're really going to do that.
[b]TL;DR[/b]
The government isn't dumb, they just know how to trick people and collect positive resonance while not actually doing shit.[/QUOTE]
I hope you're right.
[QUOTE=Strikebango;30133716]How about making thorium reactors already?![/QUOTE]
Thank fuck somebody mentioned Thorium reactors, shit is rarely mentioned in nuclear power discussions and it seems to be the ultimate solution really
I'm not exactly an environmental or economic genius but this seems like a pretty shit idea. Sure, if they can figure out a new source of power or a few to replace all that nuclear power, good on them. But in reality, nuclear power is not that dangerous at all. I read an article in some magazine about how the radiation that is leaking/leaked from the Japan plant wouldn't be any more than the radiation you get normally from just living life.
I'm really tired of all these people saying that nuclear power is so dangerous, when really it is not. Sure, bad stuff can happen, a lot of shit can get irradiated, but that is pretty rare and the main reason that the Japanese plant had a melt-down was because it got hit by one of the most powerful earthquakes in the past century (I think) and a tsunami. Also, as far as I know, nuclear power isn't really polluting like coal or what have you.
I see this change already on my bills :colbert: my electricity bills raised :colbert:
I'd like to see them doing this with fossil fuels over a longer period of time.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;30133781]Nuclear power is neat, the physics of it, the massive amounts of energy produced, all that. And we absolutely should be researching better and safer methods of harnessing it. But we've seen time and time again what happens when an older reactor kicks it so maybe it's time to put this back on the research table.
Like fusion reactors, we need to pump tons of money into developing that shit because it sounds great.[/QUOTE]
Thorium.
It's pretty much nuclear power without most of the minor downsides.
Coal and such are vastly worse means of producing energy than nuclear.
People die all the time working in laborious coal mines that are unstable, an entire CITY was completely ruined due to a currently never ending coal fire that happened underneath it's mines (the entire area is toxic to live in due to smoke and melting pavement), coal power is highly ineffcent (which wasn't a problem when it was first invented 100+ years ago but now it is), and it is highly polluting. Yet you never hear about these things from supposide anti-nuclear power supporters.
Coal is much more deadly, dangerous and bad for the enviornment than nuclear power by far when taking all factors into consideration.
Nuclear's downside is the waste, and the fact that it involves radiation. Which means if a cataclysmic event should happen (such as the earthquake) there will probably be a meltdown that will make the immediate area around the powerplant unadvisable to visit for prolonged periods of time.
What does Thorium do? Well it's basically exactly like nuclear, except it apparently has minimal waste, it's radiation doesn't tend to stick around forever, and it is apparently more abundant and cheaper to get than Uranium (not to mention safer).
You know what would be great: if people would actually read physics related to nuclear power.
It's like were going back in time because of this. Jesus! Well have fun looking at those wind farms on your backyards.
SOLAR POWER!
I'm sure they'll find a good replacement
you know the Germans always make good stuff.
that's not wise..
[QUOTE=KorJax;30142287]Thorium.
It's pretty much nuclear power without most of the minor downsides.
Coal and such are vastly worse means of producing energy than nuclear.
People die all the time working in laborious coal mines that are unstable, an entire CITY was completely ruined due to a currently never ending coal fire that happened underneath it's mines (the entire area is toxic to live in due to smoke and melting pavement), coal power is highly ineffcent (which wasn't a problem when it was first invented 100+ years ago but now it is), and it is highly polluting. Yet you never hear about these things from supposide anti-nuclear power supporters.
Coal is much more deadly, dangerous and bad for the enviornment than nuclear power by far when taking all factors into consideration.
Nuclear's downside is the waste, and the fact that it involves radiation. Which means if a cataclysmic event should happen (such as the earthquake) there will probably be a meltdown that will make the immediate area around the powerplant unadvisable to visit for prolonged periods of time.
What does Thorium do? Well it's basically exactly like nuclear, except it apparently has minimal waste, it's radiation doesn't tend to stick around forever, and it is apparently more abundant and cheaper to get than Uranium (not to mention safer).[/QUOTE]
We need some kind of march going for thorium, because right now 99% of people I've talked to have never heard of it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
