How much nuclear fuel is there really? I know it lasts a long time but there still is a finite amount.
[QUOTE=paindoc;52371556]How terrible, though? Here in Washington most of our power is from hydro and we export a large chunk of it too. Its also allowed us to make a seaport in fucking Idaho the most inland seaport in the western United states.... buuut has devastated the salmon population around here. I can't say I know too much about their effects, though.
Seattleites and king county voters are retardedly averse to nuclear power and want to shutter our local plant, and the disaster that is the Hanford site has also made many voters in this state reluctant to trust Nuclear again (nevermind that Hanford was [I]literally[/I] the first plutionium-producing reactor complex in the world). Many of them are fine with hydropower though, and I think most people still believe that Hydropower is environmentally friendly.[/QUOTE]
If you already have the dam then there's not much of a reason to not use hydro power I guess. The issue is that it wrecks the local environment via the destruction of local land and all that goes with that, including destroying natural habitats, and relocating people. It also impacts fish that try to swim upstream in a big way.
On a climate change only view then hydro is alright I guess, but it can still impact the food chain, and could potentially devastate some species populations.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;52371350]America is why. China, India, etc. are massive pushers behind this.
American companies have actually already been suffering and screaming for the government to throw tariffs on china's solar panels.
[url]https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/17/business/energy-environment/-us-imposes-steep-tariffs-on-chinese-solar-panels.html[/url]
oh and they actually achieved it too. scumfucks tbh[/QUOTE]
Would not call them scumfucks for trying to protect the American solar industry.
[QUOTE=TheNerdPest14;52371812]How much nuclear fuel is there really? I know it lasts a long time but there still is a finite amount.[/QUOTE]
a lot. Like i forget the number, but we should have enough to last us several thousand, if not millions, of years. (edit: [URL="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-long-will-global-uranium-deposits-last/"]actually sources show we have enough for 200+ years, below point still applies though. theoritically we can produce enough uranium to last 30,000 years though[/URL])
however long it is, it certainly would give us enough time to develop fusion reactors, which would be godsend "perfect" form of energy production. The point is that modern nuclear technologies are good enough till then, as discussed in [URL="https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1336387"]this legendary thread[/URL]
there's probably enough open space out here in the SW to build enough solar arrays to power the whole US
[QUOTE=Code3Response;52372018]Would not call them scumfucks for trying to protect the American solar industry.[/QUOTE]
It protects a relatively small amount of jobs, in the manufacturing and development of the panels. Potentially at the cost of jobs for those who install the panels, which provides the vast majority of jobs in the industry.
I'm not saying that it isn't right to protect the development and manufacturing of American panels, but I don't think the tariffs should make it so bad that American companies don't even have to try and cut costs at all.
Feel like we lost our right to bitch about solar panel tariffs when we pulled out of the Paris Climate agreement
[QUOTE=TheNerdPest14;52371812]How much nuclear fuel is there really? I know it lasts a long time but there still is a finite amount.[/QUOTE]
Not too finite. There are a number of Uranium mines in Canada I know of for certain, and the Uranium is mined here and then concentrated and produced somewhere else.
There's nothing particularly remarkable about fuel rods. They're just rods of fissile material that gets warm, and happen to be coated in some high-grade materials. Uranium itself isn't suitable (much) for building fission/fusion bombs, either, so its not something that's heavily regulated.
Production of fissile materials like 238Pu is heavily restricted though - the DOE has huge oversight on production of this in the US, as its only use is for things like deep-space probes (half life of 87.7 years: Voyager probes use it and their power output has only dropped ~16%). This is the kind you're probably thinking of, as it requires special breeder reactors to produce and some of its byproducts can be weaponized.
[editline]17th June 2017[/editline]
We only resumed production of 238Pu in 2013, after 25 years not producing it. NASA was the biggest customer, and Curiosity + New Horizons took rather huge bites out of their stockpile.
Now I kinda wonder where NASA stockpiles its 238Pu :thinking:
[QUOTE=LZTYBRN;52369748]You realize that people need money to exchange for goods and services and food right
I'm not defending coal but there needs to be some thought put into all those little coal mining towns in-between all the major cities. For some places that is literally the only source of any economy, and there are a lot more communities that rely on that than you think. i know here in CA some counties have adapted by creating wind farm industry towns but there are only so many, as only places that aren't in places with prohibitive wind environments can have them[/QUOTE]
where did I say "and don't help the communities reliant on coal for their economy"
I just said climate change is a bigger, more pressing concern.
[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;52373484]where did I say "and don't help the communities reliant on coal for their economy"
I just said climate change is a bigger, more pressing concern.[/QUOTE]
it def is, but the majority of rural america has been manipulated into believing that alternative energy sources will steal their livelihood. there needs to be outreach, education, shit like this to turn around the opinion on AE to make it easier for a future candidate to actually make the moves necessary to start the process. It's something that has to be built from the ground up, which very few politicians have any interest in doing. The only reason Hillary lost the vote was because trump manipulated the country into thinking she didnt care about them, and can you blame them? all she did was call his supporters deplorables. The last thing you want to do is call your potential voters shitty people, and that's what made her lose plain and simple
[editline]i'm tired just ignore me[/editline]
[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52371385]What's wrong with natural gas?[/QUOTE]
Natural gas is as natural as oil and coal (in that we just find it and dig it up frequently) and it is also a major pollutant - albeit not as bad as coal and oil. Still bad and can still fuck off.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
