And in comes the swarm of mentally retarded people saying "Hurrr nuclear power is bad".
I hope you guys consider that the people who REALLY matter are not against nuclear because they associate it with bombs, but because nuclear waste and accidents are far less localized and pretty much become an international matter as soon as they happen.
Ontop of that they last much longer. Oil spills, toxics, we can deal with that to certain degrees. Clearing nuclear waste is pretty much impossible.
Still, coal plants and oil accidents kill more people yearly than nuclear distasters have ever killed, Tshernobyl counted. However, because this form of energy contains radiation, it's suddenly "dangerous and evil".
I don't think I am capable of even comparing death numbers and besides that, death is not the only thing to look at. Remember the hundreds of thousands crippled/partly retarded children born and still born in the Ukraine and around. Even Great Britain has statistics that clearly indicate a raise in cancer/birth defect levels shortly after Tshernobyl.
[QUOTE=Killuah;32250763]I hope you guys consider that the people who REALLY matter are not against nuclear because they associate it with bombs, but because nuclear waste and accidents are far less localized and pretty much become an international matter as soon as they happen.
Ontop of that they last much longer. Oil spills, toxics, we can deal with that to certain degrees. Clearing nuclear waste is pretty much impossible.[/QUOTE]
Which is why the people who actually work in nuclear power treat is as the most serious thing on the planet. It's not their fault governments expect old stations to function forever.
Radiation isn't as dangerous as people imagine it.
[QUOTE=Killuah;32250795]I don't think I am capable of even comparing death numbers and besides that, death is not the only thing to look at. Remember the hundreds of thousands crippled/partly retarded children born and still born in the Ukraine and around. Even Great Britain has statistics that clearly indicate a raise in cancer/birth defect levels shortly after Tshernobyl.[/QUOTE]
Chernobyl was a case in which an ancient plant was run very badly and poorly in the late 1980s Soviet Union in the Ukraine.
That is possibly the worst way to run a nuclear power plant, and the results were clear.
No leak?Yeah just like fukishima...
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;32250799]Which is why the people who actually work in nuclear power treat is as the most serious thing on the planet. It's not their fault governments expect old stations to function forever.[/QUOTE]
I can only talk for Germany and I have to tell you that it is actually the cooperations pushing the politicians for longer run times as they sue over old contracts from the 70s.
They also always talk about tax-losses in the media, driving the government to fear for publicity etc.
What I want to say: It's not that easy.
[QUOTE=Baldr 2.0;32250706]I would leave the country if I were you.
[img]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4237780/Screenshot-2011-09-12_14.57.17.png[/img][/QUOTE]
With the french people you can't never be too sure
[QUOTE=Adarrek;32250832]No leak?Yeah just like fukishima...[/QUOTE]
Fukushima was an ancient station, which was criticised several times for being badly designed, hit by an earthquake and a tsunami. Not the same thing.
[QUOTE=gnisasas;32250845]With the french people you can't never be too sure[/QUOTE]
As a British resident I can attest to this.
The Scots got given special new pikes by the French during the wars with England. Turns out the flimsy weapons snapped in combat and they got raped by the English.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32250498]How many nuclear power plant disasters are necessary before it becomes more than just an "anti-nuclear fire" and a legitimate concern
Or does it go by bodycount
I'm just a pesky environmentalist who doesn't know nothing I guess[/QUOTE]
BURN IN HELL.
[editline]12th September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;32250867]As a British resident I can attest to this.
The Scots got given special new pikes by the French during the wars with England. Turns out the flimsy weapons snapped in combat and they got raped by the English.[/QUOTE]
That gave me a laugh good man.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;32250867]As a British resident I can attest to this.
The Scots got given special new pikes by the French during the wars with England. Turns out the flimsy weapons snapped in combat and they got raped by the English.[/QUOTE]
The French promised to help the Irish in the Nine Years War by sending naval reinforcements. They got caught in a storm in the bay and the English learned about the attack. Then they left.
Damn unreliable French.
[QUOTE=Novistador;32250662]If your against petroleum, nuclear, and presumeabley hydroelectic,
Your pretty much advocating for a massive drop in human standard of living, especially for those pesky poor people you seem so concerned about all the time.
But no, your right, lets "become one with nature" ie; the dirt, lets die and bury ourselves in dirt, for the earths sake, it's better off without us.[/QUOTE]
do I need to find that chart again that shows how to power the globe with solar panels alone
[editline]12th September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Test Card F;32250915]BURN IN HELL.
[/QUOTE]
:o)
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32250950]do I need to find that chart again that shows how to power the globe with solar panels alone[/QUOTE]
Solar panels have a lot of disadvantages. They're terrible and converting light into electricity, they make a LOT of heat. The materials are expensive to dig up and transport.
And clouds.
You can't power the whole planet with only one power source, it's not practical.
I bet they surrendered when it happened!
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;32250965]Solar panels have a lot of disadvantages. They're terrible and converting light into electricity, they make a LOT of heat. The materials are expensive to dig up and transport.
And clouds.
You can't power the whole planet with only one power source, it's not practical.[/QUOTE]
Of course not, the space requirements would be astronomical.
But it's a hell of a lot better than running on decades old nuclear reactors that blow up and coal that kills miners and destroys the environment
It's quite funny to read these comments and realizing noone noticed this happened at a nuclear [b]waste[/b] processing plant.
[editline]12th September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32251005]Of course not, the space requirements would be astronomical.
But it's a hell of a lot better than running on decades old nuclear reactors that blow up and coal that kills miners and destroys the environment[/QUOTE]
Cover every roof with panels and some way to store the energy and there is no problem. It doesn't even matter that much if it's always cloudy if you have a large enough surface.
Plants will remain to fill in when power needs exceed what the panels can deliver, but it also works the other way around. Homes could deliver power at night when you don't need it.
i still dont understand why we cant have nuclear cars
Nuclear energy is completely safe. Why bother with developing more green energy sources when we can take the lazy fuck way.
[QUOTE=abcpea3;32251083]i still dont understand why we cant have nuclear cars[/QUOTE]
Car crashes could possibly cause radioactive leaks.
But if this is the only solution to save the environment then OK.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32250950]do I need to find that chart again that shows how to power the globe with solar panels alone[/QUOTE]
yes please im genuinely interested in seeing that
[QUOTE=abcpea3;32251083]i still dont understand why we cant have nuclear cars[/QUOTE]
Besides leaks i think it would cause a terrible pile of nuclear waste that we don't need.
But i suppose they if at all, should run using processed nuclear waste.
[QUOTE=Hellduck;32251097]yes please im genuinely interested in seeing that[/QUOTE]
[img]http://i.imgur.com/62bDV.png[/img]
[QUOTE=Sexy Eskimo;32250382]I fucking hope France got balls of steels for once! And don't pussy out like Germany.[/QUOTE]
:(
Please, PLEASE don't tell me the fucking hours I spent educating people on nuclear energy in the fukushima threads weren't in vain. If anyone wants to quote some of those posts into this thread be my guest, I can't be assed to try and teach imbeciles again.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32251133][img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/62bDV.png[/img_thumb][/QUOTE]
ha thats pretty cool
[editline]12th September 2011[/editline]
plus im pretty sure i read something about them inventing ~100% efficient solar cells so you might not even need that much
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32251133][img]http://i.imgur.com/62bDV.png[/img][/QUOTE]
You have no idea how retarded that is, let's see, the saharan desert plant, powers all of fucking europe and north africa, yeah what would happen if there was an failure, or it got attacked, and you're forgetting the frequent sand storms there too.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32251133][img]http://i.imgur.com/62bDV.png[/img][/QUOTE]
One problem, this humanity we are talking about, having one spot for a power station isn't a good idea, it makes a good target in a war.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
