[Still, if you get rid of the ridiculous fears regarding nuclear power, you can see that it is a much better alternative than oil/coal/gas.
Three names for you......
Chernobyl
Winscale
Three Mile Island
Not ridiculous fears....
Not to mention the even worse ecological disaster when these plants come to the end of a working life and you have to dispose of them.... Which then makes the supposedly cheap electricity they made a total nonsense, because the cost of cleaning up the mess then makes it a little bit less than cheap. As well as polluting the dump site for several hundred thousand years.
Best Regards,
Julian (Fozzy The Bear)
Chernobyl: Built in the USSR where low cost was more important than safety or reliability. The accident occurred when the people running the plant decided to turn off ALL safety backups and see how long they could go without them. The design of the plant would NEVER have been acceptable here in the US, or in most other parts of the world and the entire reason the plant became a disaster is because of INCREDIBLE human stupidity and breaking every safety regulation on the face of the earth.
Winscale: Hmmmm. Once again, cost appeared to be more important than safety. Nearly every country in the world has such a strong fear of nuclear power that the budgets given to ANYTHING involving radiation is drastically cut forcing these technologies to be built using lower cost, and hence lower safety, materials. France is perhaps the only country in the world where the general populace has accepted nuclear power and as a result they have a HUGE portion of their power generated from nuclear power plants. France hasn't had any accidents.
Three Mile Island: A U.S. incident where a broken guage caused operators to misread the level of coolant in the reactor core, thus causing the fuel rods to begin melting. ALL back up safety mechanisms worked and the "incident" was contained within the reactor core. There has yet to be any valid evidence of effect on the public and it is now stated with full certainty that the public was never at risk. The USA has ALWAYS been VERY "picky" with their nuclear power plants, and TMI proved that if the plant is built properly and the proper safety mechanisms are put into place, a Chernobyl like accident could never occur.
Nuclear power, like any technology, does come with a risk. The thing is, the risks associated with nuclear power can be completely controlled if proper mechanisms are put in place and proper personnel are trained. The environmental impact can also be controlled if the proper funding is put in place so that the plant isn't forced to cut corners. The amount of nuclear waste generated by a plant can be drastically minimized, and the amount of fossil fuel required for the operation of a nuclear power plant is DRASTICALLY less than a coal or oil plant.
Granted, the BEST form of mass energy production is hydroelectric, followed by solar. The problem with hydroelectric is that you must be near a source of fast moving water, and for solar you have to rely on a constant source of sunlight. During the night, solar energy will drop.
In poorer countries or countries where cost is more important than safety, nuclear power is not a viable option. In the USA, however, nuclear power could be a great relief from our dependence on fossil fuels with regards to energy production. The really sad thing is that there are so many "activist" groups who only know 5% of the total knowledge about radioactivity and suddenly think they are experts. These people are the ones who put out the huge myths about nuclear power being so horrifically bad and damaging. They also believe that a Chernobyl style accident can happen at any time in the US. (This is 100% not possible because as I've said before, the design of the Chernobyl plant has NEVER been a design that was allowed by the United States NRC).
Finally, if you take a look at the total overall cost of running a nuclear power plant from start to finish and compare it with a coal or oil based plant, the nuclear power plant will be cheaper. (Because that nuclear 'waste' people refer to can actually be processed into a financially recoverable material that is used in research and various other professions. You know the smoke detectors you have in your house? Nuclear "waste" goes into those detectors to allow them to work.
)
I still state that if you get rid of the "ridiculous" fears involving nuclear power, it is a very viable source of energy that is sadly overlooked. I still stand by my claim that Chernobyl, TMI, and Winscale are indeed ridiculous fears because TMI didn't cause any damage at all to the populace and this has now been confirmed. In fact, the other cores at the plant are still operational! Chernobyl happened because of ridiculous plant design and absolutely horrid actions taken by the "people in charge". Winscale occurred from poor design and people trying to cut costs.
Again I say look at France and their generation of nuclear power. They haven't had accidents or widespread damages and a LARGE portion of their energy is derived from nuclear sources. I would MUCH rather hear about a nuclear power plant being put in down the road from me than a coal plant or an oil plant. The toxins released by coal and oil burning plants are far more likely to give you cancer and health problems than living near a nuclear power plant would.
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
Send this topic
Print
Topic: arcade (Read 7090 times)
