Greens doing a 'U' Turn

[Chorlton]

How long ago was it when every Green tree hugger had a sticker in his back window stating: 'Nuclear? No Thanks'
How times have changed. Now they are swarming to support the Government and its Nuclear Policy of building new reactors.
Gone are the days when those self same Tree huggers were advocating Wind Power. Now they still want them but not in the hills near them, Oh No.

Its was bloody obvious to a lot of people back then , me included, that eventually the Oil and Gas and Coal was going to run out sometime and we had to get prganised and sort out new sources of Power.
But what did the Politicians do? they mumbled and fusged about Wave Power and wind power and, eventually did nothing.
Even now in the UK we have massive arguments going on about the projected Severn Barrage which will generate power for thousands of homes.
All the conservationists (who dont live anywere near the area) are screaming about the loss of habitat for wading birds or the death of the mussel beds (dying for years anyway) yet what would they tell the people when the Gas,Oil, or Coal runs out and they only get Electricity for 2 hours per day? "Well the wading birds are Happy" will that suffice?
Nuclear, for the immediate future is the only way to go. maybe in 50 years time or so, technology might have moved on a bit, but it isnt going to help anyone in 20 years time when the lights and heat start going off.

[Foxtrot Oscar]

It's the quality NIMBY mentality.

I had a lovely argument on the go with a couple of protesters about a wind farm that is going to be built off the coast in the Sai Kung area of Hong Kong.

It all boiled down to NIMBY.

The wind farm has a .gov green light now so they're fucked, it's being built.

What the fuck do people need a view for huh? When they're indoors they're either watching the idiot-box or talking to old twats on the net.

Or in my case right now, both.

Fox

[Chorlton]

What puzzles me is.
They can make nice little Nuclear reactors for Warships and subs.
Why dont they just make lots of small Nuclear generating stations around the country for large cities or Towns, instead of fewer, bigger ones?

[hp]

Turn your town in a military machine and send in a form NN3-62. Cross out USO tour and write in nuclear reactor.

[boycotteverything]

How times have changed. Now they are swarming to support the Government and its Nuclear Policy of building new reactors.
Gone are the days when those self same Tree huggers were advocating Wind Power.i remain unmoved by your silly rant. exactly who are these 'they?' -and please read that with a medieval french accent, rosabif shit. i fuck your auntie and fart in your general direction.

[skunk]

Who are you referring to chorlton? The pseudo-hippies?

I suppose you could lump me with the rest of the 'greens' on some issues. I don't think nuclear power is the way to go. Chernobyl anyone? Three mile island? Never again.

[Chorlton]

Im referring to the tree hugging eco warriors, who 20 years ago were tyring to stop nuclear power stations.

So how do you plan to generate enough electricity for the populace then, without Nuclear? Invade Russia ?

[boycotteverything]

how about we just use less?

[skunk]

I still don't know who you're talking about chorlton. Did you see some protesters on the side of the road promoting nuclear power wearing burkenstocks and hitting the pipe?

[skunk]

So how do you plan to generate enough electricity for the populace then, without Nuclear? Invade Russia ?

Micro power. Everyone powers their own homes using solar, micro wind, or micro hydro (or other tech I am forgetting).

We can't rely on the central grid forever, we have to generate power on our own.

[boycotteverything]

Im referring to the tree hugging eco warriors, who 40 years ago were tyring to stop nuclear power stations.fixt

we're still here. yoo whoooo...

[Foxtrot Oscar]

God damm tree hugging hippies.

There's going to be a drum circle in this thread real soon.

Fox

[boycotteverything]

or you can be like Fox and live in a cardboard box in east bumfuck, china.

[Foxtrot Oscar]

or you can be like Fox and live in a cardboard box in east bumfuck, china.

Don't you know that a sentence starts witha capital letter? Also you show note that China is in-fact a proper noun and thus also deserving of a capital letter.

You are so so reatrded, I cannot possibly comprehend why people would choose to engadge you in a discourse, no matter how trivial.

blahblahblah wankwankwank

I am cogman

No, I'm :batman:

Fox

[skunk]

There's going to be a drum circle in this thread real soon.

Then you'd love downtown Asheville, where every night is hippie night. Drum circle starts around 5pm on friday. BYOH (Bring your own hemp).

[boycotteverything]

Don't you know that a sentence starts witha capital letter?witha or knot we use capitols i still make cents.

[Chorlton]

So how do you plan to generate enough electricity for the populace then, without Nuclear? Invade Russia ?

Micro power. Everyone powers their own homes using solar, micro wind, or micro hydro (or other tech I am forgetting).

We can't rely on the central grid forever, we have to generate power on our own.

Wow ! can everyone live in your wonderland or do we just have to smoke what you smoke to see the future through Rose coloured glasses?

Like I said maybe in 50 years time the technology might be there, but even then only for those that can afford it, which probably rules out 70% of the world.
Decisions have to be made NOW based on technology we have NOW or your kids will have no electricity worth having, or dont you give a fuck about your kids or are you gay?

[skunk]

The technology is here for everyone to have electricity. The problem lies in the price.

[Chorlton]

The technology is here for everyone to have electricity. The problem lies in the price.

That and reliability.
Theres nothing wrong with Nuclear Energy. We just have to enforce the rules a little better.

[boycotteverything]

your kids will have no electricityoh joy!

[boycotteverything]

oh- i forgot to add- and no bills from the utility company.

[skunk]

The technology is here for everyone to have electricity. The problem lies in the price.

That and reliability.

We are approaching 80% efficiency with some solar panels. They are still in testing. There was a thread here about them, but I think the great apeci has taken them away.


Theres nothing wrong with Nuclear Energy. We just have to enforce the rules a little better.

Something about splitting or joining atoms gives me the creeps. Go figure.

Maybe I'm nuts for being concerned over the grid being powered by nuclear energy.

We're trading one limited resource (fossil fuels) for another. Great energy plan!

Why not take be's advice and pay no fucking bills.

[Chorlton]

The technology is here for everyone to have electricity. The problem lies in the price.

That and reliability.

We are approaching 80% efficiency with some solar panels. They are still in testing. There was a thread here about them, but I think the great apeci has taken them away.


Theres nothing wrong with Nuclear Energy. We just have to enforce the rules a little better.

Something about splitting or joining atoms gives me the creeps. Go figure.
Then I suggest you learn to live with it because, in the short term, its the only answer.
Nuclear isnt a limited resource.

[skunk]

Then I suggest you learn to live with it because, in the short term, its the only answer.

It takes fucking forever to build a nuke plant, how is that a short term answer? Not to mention they're expensive as anything. I've read anywhere from $1 billion to $10 billion.

Do you have that kind of change lying around your house?

A typical 1 million kilowatt plant only powers 100K homes or so.

Let's do some math.

I'll use the $1 billion number to be a bit conservative with the pricing.

$1 billion powers 100K homes using nuclear power.

It costs between $30-40K, depending on how you install/create your solar panels (you can build a panel for $100-$200 and install it yourself for free). 5 kilowatts powers an average size home.

$40K for one home.

$1 billion for 100K, which translates to about $10K/home.

If you use the less conservative number of $10 billion per nuclear plant, the cost rises to $100K/home.

And there's no pollution with solar.

Then we get into the technical aspects of combining different energy sources depending on where you live.

In the desert, solar makes sense. In the british isles, where it isn't sunny hardly ever, wind power (and wave power) make sense.


Nuclear isnt a limited resource.

Are you sure about that?

[boycotteverything]

in the short term, its the only answer.well that begs the other question- which is, 'why not just let this ridiculous house of cards fall under its own weight rather than try to sustain the unsustainable?' The LLF has issued you a T&C warning, mr. hog farmer.

[Chorlton]

[quote=Chorlton]
Then I suggest you learn to live with it because, in the short term, its the only answer.


It takes fucking forever to build a nuke plant, how is that a short term answer?


Actually it doesnt. In the UK were in the process of planning 4 more Nke sites which will be online by 2017


Nuclear isnt a limited resource.
Are you sure about that?[/quote:2i1b91c2]

Whilst not unlimited, their lifetime will give us the time needed to properly develop alternatives and Nuclear is far more sustainable than Gas, Coal or Petroleum based energy.
I do agree that more has to be done for home bases systems. Ive been advocating Solar water heating to be installed in all new builds and it looks like that will finally come to fruition soon.

[skunk]

Now we're back to the premise of your OP. Who the fuck are you talking about?

[skunk]

Whilst not unlimited, their lifetime will give us the time needed to properly develop alternatives

We have alternatives already, we're just not using them.


Nuclear is far more sustainable than Gas, Coal or Petroleum based energy.

Not going to argue with you on this point.

[boycotteverything]

it seems like discussing band aids is more to your liking than considering the natural alternative to this pernicious game we're involved in. c'est la vie. but never say you weren't warned.

[skunk]

You mean how we're addicted to electricity? What do you think we're using now to communicate?

Overconsumption becomes less of an issue when energy is generated using nature and pollution is next to nothing.

[Chorlton]

Well as I said, were just in the process of giving the go ahead for at least 4 new reactors.
Its either that or be held to ransom by the russians for their gas, and that will never happen to us.

As I stated, Windpower used to be supported by the eco warrior-treehuggers untill they started building them next to their tepee's and tents. That soon got their attention.

Nuclear is the only way.

[Chorlton]

You mean how we're addicted to electricity? What do you think we're using now to communicate?

Overconsumption becomes less of an issue when energy is generated using nature and pollution is next to nothing.
Or generated by Nuclear.

[Snow Crash]

Decentralised utilities, with the majority supplied by the homestead, would be ideal. I believe the tech is there, it's just silenced.

But then, we'd be free of arse-raping energy cartels and Governments that use energy as a weapon, wouldn't we? And that'd never do...

[Cogburn]

Who are you referring to chorlton? The pseudo-hippies?

I suppose you could lump me with the rest of the 'greens' on some issues. I don't think nuclear power is the way to go. Chernobyl anyone? Three mile island? Never again.
RAWR..... ignorant tripe.

The Cherny was old even by Russian standards and, most importantly, the accident was caused by human beings doing something inarguably stupid that was outside the specifications of the reactor design: they were trying to get MOAR POWER in a very Tim "The Toolman" Taylor sense.

Three Mile Island's "china syndrome", which is to what you are referring, is a complete falsehood and physical impossibility dramatized in cinematic form to put Jane Fonda back on the screen in a compassionate roll (after she was seen straddling NVA AAA batteries, that is).

Get your shit straight.

[theeindiee]

The thought of using energy as a weapon would prolly occur to about half the entire population of the world. i guess we could try killing as many potential hitlers as possible. Mass pre-crime genocide. green up the world with human fertilizer, ay?

[FancyFree]

I'm with skunk on this one...I agree that solar/wind power is the best idea here. But, that being said...it IS expensive to get solar panels. What I don't understand is that the Governments of the world, push the eco/green/global warming argument hard but they don't make it easier for the people to actually do these things. Here in Canada, in my province anyway, the government will give rebates for home improvements that are more eco friendly...for example, installing 5 star energy rated appliances, or higher efficiancy air conditioners and furnaces, adding better insulation in your home, new windows etc etc. I'm not sure if they are giving any kind of incentives or rebates for something like solar panels but that's the point....I've heard about everything else they give rebates for (and most of the rebates hardly makes it worthwhile) but not where solar power is concerned. You'd think that if they really were so eco gung ho for the population like they push, say, global warming blah blah fucking blah, that promoting solar power and giving rebates or incentives to the people would be on high on their eco friendly list. Especially for people building new homes, there could be a lower cost or rebate or SOMETHING for people to have solar panels installed either from the builder or the government. All boils down to money. Fucking governments. lol

[FancyFree]

That being said however......some people are doing it, as I've watched a couple shows about eco friendly or "green" homes. It's actually very cool, just takes A LOT more planning and work and these people were basically building their homes themselves, without contractors ect, which would be VERY hard for most people to do. Some of the homes were built into hills, say in arizona for example, for better cooling purposes, the walls were insulated with recycled tires, water was continually recycled through out the home in quite an amazing system ,and of course, there were solar panels. And I was surprised how little solar panels they needed and used to power their homes. Food for thought. :)

[Chorlton]

And there is the problem. The way houses are built in high density areas in UK cities. Practically impossible for solar anything.
Oh its fine if like me you live out in the countryside, but for the poor sods who live in some towns and cities, many of which are over 200 years old its impossible. Apart from which I dont want a fucking great windmill outside my door.

Nuclear is the only way to go.

[skunk]

Wind/wave power works in the UK.

[skunk]

RAWR..... ignorant tripe.

Rawr back to you. They didn't melt down?

[skunk]

Decentralised utilities, with the majority supplied by the homestead, would be ideal. I believe the tech is there, it's just silenced.

But then, we'd be free of arse-raping energy cartels and Governments that use energy as a weapon, wouldn't we? And that'd never do...

Cog and chorlton would rather see exxon and shell build 'green' nuke plants and continue charging up the ass for utilities.

[Cogburn]

RAWR..... ignorant tripe.

Rawr back to you. They didn't melt down?
If I take my car and increase it to 300HP and run it into a tree is it the fault of the car?

Also, you do realize that nuclear material isn't something we invented, it's something we dug out of the ground: it's both natural and, due to the properties of nuclear reactors, renewable.

So at first you make an argument that they are unsafe, which you are losing, so you move the goal posts to cost.

How much does it cost to build and maintain a windfarm that may supply the same number of people as your average nuclear power plant in relation to the cost to build and maintain the latter?

If you can't answer it, your argument is bullshit.

[skunk]

If I take my car and increase it to 300HP and run it into a tree is it the fault of the car?

Again, they didn't melt down? Human stupidity was the cause for both melt downs, you think that can't or won't happen in the future?

You're dreaming.

People make mistakes.


Also, you do realize that nuclear material isn't something we invented, it's something we dug out of the ground: it's both natural and, due to the properties of nuclear reactors, renewable.

Yeah I am aware where nuclear material comes from, the ground, from mines. Real "green".


So at first you make an argument that they are unsafe, which you are losing, so you move the goal posts to cost.

Oh noes I'm losing an argument. I better go cry about it now.

Are you claiming nuclear power plants are 100% safe? The waste is safe? The radiation from the plant for the workers and neighbors are safe?

No possibility of future melt downs?

Cost is hardly an issue for large centralized federal governments such as US, UK, France, Russia, etc.

But for 'developing' nations, it doesn't really make sense to invest $1-$10 billion per plant.


How much does it cost to build and maintain a windfarm that may supply the same number of people as your average nuclear power plant in relation to the cost to build and maintain the latter?

Yeah maybe later when I'm more awake.


If you can't answer it, your argument is bullshit.

Why's that, because I don't feel like wiki/googling right now?

Why are you so against 100% renewable non-polluting energy that doesn't dig up materials from the ground?

Are you also a nuclear lobbyist? Jesus christ dude.

[Snow Crash]

Decentralised utilities, with the majority supplied by the homestead, would be ideal. I believe the tech is there, it's just silenced.

But then, we'd be free of arse-raping energy cartels and Governments that use energy as a weapon, wouldn't we? And that'd never do...

Cog and chorlton would rather see exxon and shell build 'green' nuke plants and continue charging up the ass for utilities.

If that be the the case, then they are fucking fools. Tech and environmental concerns aside, trusting Exxon and Shell with nuclear material? That's like dropping Jason Voorhees off at the nearest McDonalds with a pickaxe.

[lala]

They just put up a heap of wind turbines here, the people that live by them all hate them because of the noise . . . its driving them nutty, some have even had there home double glazed so they can get some sleep, but as they say it goes 24/7 and it use to be nice to go out side, but the noise is never ending and even scared off the birds. Plus there talk of them effecting animals, here a link to a farmer who reckons his goats have been dropping like flies . . . http://www.nowpublic.com/environment/taiwanese-goats-may-have-died-wind-farm-noise

So I'm in two minds about these wind farms, we have to see what the sheep say :D
Notice how the company offer to pay for relocation, but it got nothing to do with the wind turbines, in there opinion, wonder why they paid, god there nice people!!!! :shock:

[mojo]

heaps of wind farms popping up all over australia, and in the process pissing off lots of people, for some of the same reasons lala mentioned.
noise pollution is just one part of it.
wind energy does increase the cost of electricity, albeit marginally.
they generally only operate at a fraction of their capacity.
there is the possibility of fires being caused from wind farms.
the impact on biodiversity, around 3000 birds and a similar amount of bats are killed by wind turbines each year in australia.

[Bitchkoma]

I feel like the anti-nuke crowd's been brainwashed by the ptb. Every country should have nuke power. Unfortunately you get the crowd that's scared of proliferation arguing that nukes are not safe blah blah blah wank wank fap fap.

I think turbines are a good idea but it's just shit to deploy. plus they kill bats.

Now there was this thing I saw... oh wait, that's got nothing to do with producing power, just plankton.

[Cogburn]

Shhhh... BK.... don't tell the fools that the metal for the wind turbines comes out of the ground from mines, too.

They're heads will explode.

[mojo]

Shhhh... BK.... don't tell the fools that the metal for the wind turbines comes out of the ground from mines, too.

They're heads will explode.


aha.....ahahahahahahahahaha.

roflmao.

[skunk]

How do you dispose of the nuclear waste cogburn? Bury it under Yucca mountain?

[lala]

Here some info on nuclear reators for power . . . . :D

[offsite:1wfj8gvt][Nuclear plants are very safe," asserted Forrest J. Remick, professor emeritus of nuclear engineering, adding, "It helps to compare their safety record with that of other major industries." In 2005, the industrial accident rate for nuclear power plant workers was 0.24 per 200,000 worker hours, compared with 3.5 accidents per 200,000 worker hours for all manufacturing industries (14.6 times greater). But what about those of us who live near nuclear plants? Said Remick, "No member of the public has been killed or injured from radiation during the nearly 50 years that commercial nuclear power plants have been operating in the U.S."
http://www.physorg.com/news91464289.html
/offsite]

[offsite]But in other countries, they’ve been able to make it work. In France, for instance, about 75 percent of electricity is generated from nuclear power. Worldwide, it provides 17% of our energy. The US has not brought a new plant online since 1996 yet still generates 788.6 billion kilowatt-hours (KWh) yearly – almost 20% of the US total – accident free.

Nuclear power is like a handgun. It’s the people handling it who are dangerous. But there is one big difference: with a handgun, you shoot a few people at most. A reactor accident could wipe several hundred square miles – permanently.

But all technologies start out crawling before they can walk or even run. The nuclear scientists have been working on the safety problems and already may have solved them.

Danger aside, what makes nuclear power attractive? It’s competitive or cheaper than other forms of power generation. It’s easy to build compact plants that generate hundreds if not thousands of megawatts – something wind and solar can never hope to match. See the chart below to compare energy generation costs.
http://www.physorg.com/news8956.html[/offsite:1wfj8gvt]

[Cogburn]

You don't "dispose" of nuclear "waste", dumbass.

You make more nuclear fuel out of it through something called "reprocessing". Google is your friend.

The only country that stockpiles spent fuel rods instead of reprocessing them... the United States.

You know what you can use spent fuel rods for other than new fuel?

Bombs.

Get a clue.

[Chorlton]

Wind/wave power works in the UK.
Windpower requires a huge wind generator. It makes a damned lot of noise. Would you want one in your garden?.
Wave power development is still in its infancy.
Like I said its going to take 50 to 100 years for alternative tech to be able to take over. We need something before then.

Nuclear.

[Chorlton]

Decentralised utilities, with the majority supplied by the homestead, would be ideal. I believe the tech is there, it's just silenced.

But then, we'd be free of arse-raping energy cartels and Governments that use energy as a weapon, wouldn't we? And that'd never do...

Cog and chorlton would rather see exxon and shell build 'green' nuke plants and continue charging up the ass for utilities.

Dont assume you know what I would see, You Dont.
In the UK the Nuclear plants are built by private contractors but commisioned by the Government.
Whilst our Sellafield Nuclear plant hasnt been the best, that one was a learning curve, all our other plants have and still are performing flawlessly.
We may also use the French designed stations which are quite good and cheaper than our designs.

I hope you enjoy cooking your food on a wood fire (assuming it hasnt all been cut down) and lighting your home from Cow fat, assuming they havent all be stolen.

[Chorlton]

Why are you so against 100% renewable non-polluting energy that doesn't dig up materials from the ground?.

Because the technology isnt properly developed yet and using your other argument poor nations cant afford it. Do you know those wind generators are made from GRP and steel? Thats Non renewable old chap.

There is NO such thing as non-polluting energy generators. You pollute when you make them. The wind generators are damned noisy, wave power is still under development, anything else is too expensive but all of the above are made from stuff that comes from the ground.
Self defeating argument there, junior.

[Chorlton]

How do you dispose of the nuclear waste cogburn? Bury it under Yucca mountain?

No, you drop it on North Korea.
Or Muncie, Indiana.

[Cogburn]

You are seriously fucked up when you start posting before 9am.

[Chorlton]

How so when I get up at 6.00AM ?

You LIKE Muncie Indiana ?

Or misunderstand English Humour?

[Cogburn]

More to the fact you felt compelled to respond in four separate posts.

[Chorlton]

I answered every post as I read it, giving the OP the respect they deserved, or didnt.

[Chorlton]

Oh yes

More Nuclear Staions

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/6533642/Utilities-given-the-nuclear-go-ahead-as-coal-falters.html

[mojo]

How do you dispose of the nuclear waste cogburn? Bury it under Yucca mountain?

ship it to tasmania.

[boycotteverything]

The answer to this energy problem in the US lies not in producing more but in using less. To my mind it needs to be rationed. I'd limit any house to no more than 30 amps of electricity and 40,000 BTUs of gas or oil. That's about the same level of consumption that existed in the 1930's. Commercial buildings would similarly restricted on a square foot basis allowing for the climate in a given area. Air conditioning would be banned entirely. Water use would be restricted to 20 gallons per adult per day per household. Cars would be required to achieve 70 miles per gallon. No oil would be allowed to be imported into or exported from the United States. Done deal. Problem solved. Similar measures would apply to every country in the world depending on its resources.

[skunk]

Wind/wave power works in the UK.
Windpower requires a huge wind generator. It makes a damned lot of noise.

No it actually doesn't require a huge generator, nor do the smaller ones make a lot of noise.

Building massive wind/solar farms is in my opinion another bad idea.

Guess who funds a project like that? The energy companies.

What I am looking forward to is families putting up microwind turbines, not the massive ones that power more than one home.

Small scale, decentralized power generation. No more power plants!

The five best micro wind turbines (http://cleantechnica.com/2008/03/21/the-five-best-micro-wind-turbines/)


Wave power development is still in its infancy.

Yes and no. The large scale wave power 'turbines' if you will are still being perfected, but that's not the case for the smaller scale versions.

The motorwave (http://www.motorwavegroup.com/new/wii.html)

Not to mention I even forgot to mention microhydro power.

Micro hydro pros/cons (http://www.alternative-energy-news.info/micro-hydro-power-pros-and-cons/)


There is NO such thing as non-polluting energy generators. You pollute when you make them.

True.


The wind generators are damned noisy,

Only the large scale ones, and they're typically placed 'in the middle of nowhere' here in the states. They sound like the wind blowing to me.


anything else is too expensive but all of the above are made from stuff that comes from the ground.

Jesus christ, I'm not against digging in the ground. I'm against digging in the ground for nuclear materials.

[boycotteverything]

conserve first. the innovations will come from the desire to mitigate imposed hardship. and no other way.

[mojo]

Air conditioning would be banned entirely.

unworkable in some environments.
we are entering a 100 year record heatwave period atm, at similar times last year old people were dying because they were scared to use their air conditioners becaiuse of the cost, adding another fear factor into their lives would only cause more deaths.

[boycotteverything]

let them use fans.

[mojo]

let them use fans.

you all haven't expreienced an aussie heatwave, a fan ain't going to do fuck all.

[skunk]

Phoenix is just as bad. Its illegal to not have A/C.

[boycotteverything]

Then they'll just need to find a way to produce without the use of fossil or nuclear fuels. Seems to me Phoenix and Oz have a little sunshine, no?

[Chorlton]

.
Nothing of note said.


You dont really live in the real world do you. Do you want me to send you some candles?

[skunk]

As soon as I have a few grand, I am purchasing a microwind generator. The solar panels come later depending on where I live.

I'm living my own word, are you?



.
Nothing of note said.


Typical cop out. Tell us what you really think.

[mojo]

Then they'll just need to find a way to produce without the use of fossil or nuclear fuels. Seems to me Phoenix and Oz have a little sunshine, no?

just a little bit, it's what killed my grandfather, melanoma's. lived in the top end for 70 years.

heres some fun facts.

[offsite:3eg3mpsi]The record for the longest heat wave in the world is generally accepted to have been set at Marble Bar in Australia, where from October 31, 1923 to April 7, 1924 the temperature broke the 37.8 °C (100.0 °F) benchmark, setting the heat wave record at 160 days.[20][/offsite:3eg3mpsi]

[offsite:3eg3mpsi]In January 2008, Alice Springs in Australia's Northern Territory recorded ten consecutive days of temperatures above 40 °C (104 °F) with the average temperature for that month being 39.8 °C (103.6 °F). In March 2008, Adelaide, South Australia experienced maximum temperatures of above 35 °C (95 °F) for fifteen consecutive days, seven days more than the previous longest stretch of 35 °C (95 °F) days. The March 2008 heat wave also included eleven consecutive days above 38 °C (100 °F).[24] The heat wave was especially notable because it occurred in March, an autumn month, in which Adelaide averages only 2.3 days above 35 °C (95 °F).[25][/offsite:3eg3mpsi]


[offsite:3eg3mpsi]Heat waves are the most lethal type of weather phenomenon, overall. Between 1992 and 2001, deaths from excessive heat in the United States numbered 2,190, compared with 880 deaths from floods and 150 from hurricanes.[9] The average annual number of fatalities directly attributed to heat in the United States is about 400[/offsite:3eg3mpsi]

i remember as a kid in alice springs we had about 4 days in a row above 42 (107f) on the 5th day it reached 48, people were dropping like flies.

[mojo]

As soon as I have a few grand, I am purchasing a microwind generator. The solar panels come later depending on where I live.

I'm living my own word, are you?

we will get solar panels on our place when we can afford it.

[Chorlton]

Yes, I live in the real world where windpower and wave power are fantasies and dreams.

Reality is major cities with millions of people living there, no or little wind and no wave power

Nuclear is the way forward

[skunk]

Sounds like you have your head in the sand chorlton. I have work now, will continue educating you later.

[boycotteverything]

i remember as a kid in alice springs we had about 4 days in a row above 42 (107f) on the 5th day it reached 48, people were dropping like flies.All true. But on the other hand Australia is a world leader in solar technology. That's the hope for Alice Springs.

[mojo]

i remember as a kid in alice springs we had about 4 days in a row above 42 (107f) on the 5th day it reached 48, people were dropping like flies.All true. But on the other hand Australia is a world leader in solar technology. That's the hope for Alice Springs.

true, which is why it's equally puzzling why the govt wants to remove the subsidy for installing solar panels on our homes.

[boycotteverything]

Yes, I live in the real world where windpower and wave power are fantasies and dreams.

Reality is major cities with millions of people living there, no or little wind and no wave power

Nuclear is the way forwardIt's the way forward towards continued waste. There is no denying that we use way more power than we need. Can you live in 30 Amps? If so there's already a surplus.

[boycotteverything]

i remember as a kid in alice springs we had about 4 days in a row above 42 (107f) on the 5th day it reached 48, people were dropping like flies.All true. But on the other hand Australia is a world leader in solar technology. That's the hope for Alice Springs.

true, which is why it's equally puzzling why the govt wants to remove the subsidy for installing solar panels on our homes.Check for oil stocks in their investment portfolios. Therein may lay the answer!

[mojo]

no doubt.

[Chorlton]

Yes we do
All lightbulbs in the house are those shitty eco bulbs. Heating only goes on when temperature drops quite low.
Freezer only comes on for 5 hours per night. Its double insulated.
We dont use a tumble dryer, washing machine uses cold water.
I suspect we may go over from time to time but not much
Apart from which our Mains fuse is 30 Amps, we cant go much over that or it blows.

[boycotteverything]

Well- you're doing your part. Now we need to convince everyone else to.
Heating only goes on when temperature drops quite low.well you've got your wife and edwina to keep you warm at night. all i have is this damned stuffed cat.

[mojo]

Well- you're doing your part. Now we need to convince everyone else to.

good luck with that.

[boycotteverything]

I hate to say it- but that's where the law comes in. A new rationing law.

[Chorlton]

Just build more Nuclear reactors.
Im sure one would look quite pretty beside Ayers Rock (I climbed that once) or even put some nice Wind Generators on top of it.
Im sure the boongs would be really happy, just offer them a case of Emu Export.

[boycotteverything]

Fuck nuclear reactors. Just use no more energy than you need and we won't require any of the fucking things.

[FancyFree]

I hate to admit it, but BE has a point...we are greedy assholes when it comes to energy use and with the way technology and lifestyles are going...it's just bound to get worse. So why compound the BIGGER picture with more nuclear reactors. We need to learn to live with using less energy and start coming up with better, more innovative ideas to be able to harness wind/solar/wave power. And like skunk said as well, i'm not advocating the huge wind turbines either, the micro ones sound fine to me, just enough to power one household. And not only that, the government, like i said before, should lower the costs/and or give incentives or rebates to people willing to use these alternative methods.

[FancyFree]

Oh and maybe to help combat the obesity problem as well.......we just have our energy supplies hooked up to a bike that u have to pedal to generate it.......TA-fucking-DA!

:lol:

[boycotteverything]

good point. why spend your time peddling off the fat when you could have chosen not to gain it to begin with? i guess that's the basic question when it comes to managing energy. abject gluttony. the essence of the problem is 'using what you need' from the world. resolving the desire for excess resolves the problem of consumption- and ultimately preserves the planet for our children. it's really not that hard...

[Chorlton]

Shut down all the bastard McD's, Colonel Sanders, Burger kings, Subway (Subway ?? Fucking wankers, they dont even sell train tickets)
Those useless coffee shops Starbucks. That would be a good start. Then theres the Wimpey bars

[boycotteverything]

just boycott the pricks till they fall like autumn leaves.

[Cogburn]

good point. why spend your time peddling off the fat when you could have chosen not to gain it to begin with? i guess that's the basic question when it comes to managing energy. abject gluttony. the essence of the problem is 'using what you need' from the world. resolving the desire for excess resolves the problem of consumption- and ultimately preserves the planet for our children. it's really not that hard...
To whom do you deem the responsibility for highlighting the glutton?

Am I a glutton, or am I a garage inventor?

Am I a glutton, or am I growing my own food and medicine?

Am I a glutton, or am I a home based manufacturing business?

Electricity is a fundamental property of the universe in which we live. If you are going to concede that power generation stations are necessary, which I don't because I have a healthy lay understanding of physics, then the best logical choice is nuclear power and the unlimited access to its creation.

That is if we wish to continue to ignore Tesla for the motive of profit as opposed to raising the living standards of every person on the planet, mind you.

[pack3tg0st]

sheesh... read through 3 pages before I skipped to here... lets lay some facts straight...

1) Chernobyl occured because of an accident that happened during the testing of a safety device... not because they were trying to wring more power out of the reactor

2) The only meltdowns in civil nuclear history happened in russia... TMI wasn't a meltdown... it was close though..

3) Nuclear power has had a few disasters, but all in all, statistically the plants are safer than most other energy sources.

4) Some reactors (called Breeder reactors) create even more fissionable material as a by product... thus, making more fuel for the reactor (instead of waste)...

5) Why the fuck do we really need more electricity per household than one could generate by pedaling a bike?

I'm of the opinion that the energy crisis isn't going to be resolved by finding less destructive ways to feed our gluttonous lust for excess... Arguing how to make more power is moot to me... We should be asking why we need the power to begin with...

/rant.

[Chorlton]

Pack.
The problem isnt that we need more energy. (though we probably will)
The problem is, that the energy sources needed to generate Electricity, even at our present consumtion rates, are failing fast and will eventually run out. That is a fact.
We need an interim source such as Nuclear to tide the world over untill the others souces mentioned are developed to a point where the manufaturing costs and sale cost have diminshed so as everyone can have them.

Nuclear IS the only short term answer.
The others are minimalist, unworkeable solutions.

[pack3tg0st]

Who says we need power on the scale we use now?

[Cogburn]

I've got designs on taking a motorcycle ride through the Exclusion Zone within the next 10 years, so Cherny is something of a hobby.


1) Chernobyl occured because of an accident that happened during the testing of a safety device... not because they were trying to wring more power out of the reactor
[offsite=http://www.whatisnuclear.com/chernobyl/timeline.html:1a7fxgyf]Normal operation: reactor was at full power. Steam power was directed to both turbines of the power generators. The purpose of the test was to determine if one of the turbines could supply power to feedwater pumps until standby diesel generators came on line in the case of a local power failure.[/offsite:1a7fxgyf]
Truth be told: po-tay-to, po-tah-to. The test itself was done under full power to study the responses of the reactor. It was being used outside the designed specifications to boost potential power output and proper safeguards weren't taken. Boom.


2) The only meltdowns in civil nuclear history happened in russia... TMI wasn't a meltdown... it was close though..
Not only was Cherny a meltdown, it was also an explosion that threw the 200 ton concrete and steel lid of containment vessel 25 feet and 15 tons of radioactive material into the air. Radioactive slag melted through 3 or more containment layers of concrete and cooled into deadly radioactive heaps of metal about 100 feet under the reactor. I'll leave it to you to calculate the amount of energy released.

[Cogburn]

Who says we need power on the scale we use now?
Free will. Ain't it a bitch?

[Chorlton]

You are going into the Exclusion Zone? Pretty fucking stupid idea, sunshine.
In 1997 I went to Gomel in Byelorussia, to take stuff to some Hospitals.
We were taken out on a trip towards Chernobyl but still outside the exclusion zone. We stopped in the countryside and the guide got a geiger counter out and stuck it down to the soil. It went off the scale !!!!! Now I dont know what scale he had it set at, but he was alarmed enough to get us all back in and turned around and head back from whence we had come.
Even in the market where we wanted to buy food for our hosts they warned us not to as so much of it was radioactive.

Of course, if you want to read a book by the light shining from your glowing testicles.....feel free

[pack3tg0st]

well... I say let everyone use as much power as they care to generate on their own.

[pack3tg0st]

2) The only meltdowns in civil nuclear history happened in russia... TMI wasn't a meltdown... it was close though..
Not only was Cherny a meltdown, it was also an explosion that threw the 200 ton concrete and steel lid of containment vessel 25 feet and 15 tons of radioactive material into the air. Radioactive slag melted through 3 or more containment layers of concrete and cooled into deadly radioactive heaps of metal about 100 feet under the reactor. I'll leave it to you to calculate the amount of energy released.[/quote]

TMI is Three Mile Island... which was an "incident" but not a meltdown

Chernobyl was.

I don't get the argument lol

Meltdowns have only happened to the russians...

[Cogburn]

I misinterpreted "TMI" out-of-context as "to my information", or something like that.

It's still early out here.

:)

[pack3tg0st]

hehehe I'm almost done with my first pot of coffee...

Better get crackin' on the caffeine man!

[boycotteverything]

sheesh... read through 3 pages before I skipped to here... lets lay some facts straight...

1) Chernobyl occured because of an accident that happened during the testing of a safety device... not because they were trying to wring more power out of the reactor

2) The only meltdowns in civil nuclear history happened in russia... TMI wasn't a meltdown... it was close though..

3) Nuclear power has had a few disasters, but all in all, statistically the plants are safer than most other energy sources.

4) Some reactors (called Breeder reactors) create even more fissionable material as a by product... thus, making more fuel for the reactor (instead of waste)...

5) Why the fuck do we really need more electricity per household than one could generate by pedaling a bike?

I'm of the opinion that the energy crisis isn't going to be resolved by finding less destructive ways to feed our gluttonous lust for excess... Arguing how to make more power is moot to me... We should be asking why we need the power to begin with...

/rant.You've made some good points. But had you been in the discussion earlier you'd have seen that those points were already made. To wit

"The answer to this energy problem in the US lies not in producing more but in using less. To my mind it needs to be rationed. I'd limit any house to no more than 30 amps of electricity and 40,000 BTUs of gas or oil. That's about the same level of consumption that existed in the 1930's. Commercial buildings would similarly restricted on a square foot basis allowing for the climate in a given area. Air conditioning would be banned entirely. Water use would be restricted to 20 gallons per adult per day per household. Cars would be required to achieve 70 miles per gallon. No oil would be allowed to be imported into or exported from the United States. Done deal. Problem solved. Similar measures would apply to every country in the world depending on its resources."

You're right. It's all about excess and gluttony. Somehow the world seems to have concluded that the planet itself is a commodity to be consumed for our frivolous diversions. To any humanitarian this is simply not so.

[Chorlton]

Do you have the ban on Filament bulbs in the US?
All 100watt filament bulbs are now banned in the EU and no more are produced.
60 Watt are still available but they will be banned from next year so only these poxy eco bulbs are available.

[boycotteverything]

No ban here. They're still available in the US. Europe has the right idea.

[pack3tg0st]

oh god not the lightbulb debate again...

[Chorlton]

It will come, believe me> Just sad you have your silly 120Volts
Totally useless to us.

[boycotteverything]

It will come, believe me> as it should

[Cogburn]

You are going into the Exclusion Zone? Pretty fucking stupid idea, sunshine.
In 1997 I went to Gomel in Byelorussia, to take stuff to some Hospitals.
We were taken out on a trip towards Chernobyl but still outside the exclusion zone. We stopped in the countryside and the guide got a geiger counter out and stuck it down to the soil. It went off the scale !!!!! Now I dont know what scale he had it set at, but he was alarmed enough to get us all back in and turned around and head back from whence we had come.
Even in the market where we wanted to buy food for our hosts they warned us not to as so much of it was radioactive.

Of course, if you want to read a book by the light shining from your glowing testicles.....feel free
I really want to see Pripyat and, like I said, I've been tossing it around for a few years. "Extreme tourism" is one thing, but I don't feel like dying, either. The current Ukrainian government doesn't mind, they just make you sign 400 waivers.

It's just another ghost town like the 100's in California with their own attendant dangers.

As long as you don't leave the pavement, don't inhale clouds of dust, fondle metallic objects, etc, you're fine.

Well.... and don't stay for longer than 8 hours. No campouts or cross-country hiking trips, that's for sure.

Parts of the forest still glow red at night.

[skunk]

You still haven't answered my question from page one chorlton.

Who the fuck are you talking about? This child wants to know.

[boycotteverything]

You are going into the Exclusion Zone? Pretty fucking stupid idea, sunshine.
In 1997 I went to Gomel in Byelorussia, to take stuff to some Hospitals.
We were taken out on a trip towards Chernobyl but still outside the exclusion zone. We stopped in the countryside and the guide got a geiger counter out and stuck it down to the soil. It went off the scale !!!!! Now I dont know what scale he had it set at, but he was alarmed enough to get us all back in and turned around and head back from whence we had come.
Even in the market where we wanted to buy food for our hosts they warned us not to as so much of it was radioactive.

Of course, if you want to read a book by the light shining from your glowing testicles.....feel free
I really want to see Pripyat and, like I said, I've been tossing it around for a few years. "Extreme tourism" is one thing, but I don't feel like dying, either. The current Ukrainian government doesn't mind, they just make you sign 400 waivers.

It's just another ghost town like the 100's in California with their own attendant dangers.

As long as you don't leave the pavement, don't inhale clouds of dust, fondle metallic objects, etc, you're fine.

Well.... and don't stay for longer than 8 hours. No campouts or cross-country hiking trips, that's for sure.

Parts of the forest still glow red at night.This is the best tour I've yet seen. Check it out!
http://www.kiddofspeed.com/

[Cogburn]

Ahhh... Elena is the inspiration for my trip!

I heard her on Art Bell and totally fell in love with the entire thing.

[boycotteverything]

i heard that show too. she's dynamite.

[boycotteverything]

http://www.theserpentswall.com/images/p8-image1.jpg
Elena

[Martian Exile]

To my mind it needs to be rationed. I'd limit any house to no more than 30 amps of electricity

While I’m not against newclear power (As Howland Owl would call it) I do agree completely with BE regarding the 30 amps. My first house had a 30 amp main and it was all I needed. When I moved onto my boat 14 some years ago it was considerably less than that. I lived on less than 30 amps from 1975 until just a few months ago.

I tease my wife about my old Antebellum house in Kentucky, telling her of my plans to pull the plug on the old joint being as it did not have juice from 1792 until 1920 something. I have my sister in the joint now and we are at war over the wiring. I tell her no room should ever need more than 15 amps (all the old nine gauge wire can hold). She feels like she is camping out. I don’t get it. How the fuck could one use so god damn much juice? It’s the stupid elctro whiz bang gadgets she has for the kids. Monster plasma boob tube and such.

By the way Chorlton, your 30 amps would be 60 amps here, being as you folks have twice the voltage.

Wind mills suck. You can hear the monsters for miles, and they kill bats and birds like mad. They would be fine if they used the slow speed blades like Airmoter used in water wind mills. When a yacht shows up up in an anchorage with a high speed wind mill it is treated like a pariah and told to move to the other side of the anchorage.

Use less and breed less.


the innovations will come from the desire to mitigate imposed hardship. and no other way.

Agreed.

[Cogburn]

http://www.dyson.com/fans/

I keep seeing these fucking things all over the place and can't wonder if there's a happy medium somewhere.

[Martian Exile]

We have used a similar contraption in the mines for years.

[Chorlton]

You are going into the Exclusion Zone? Pretty fucking stupid idea, sunshine.
In 1997 I went to Gomel in Byelorussia, to take stuff to some Hospitals.
We were taken out on a trip towards Chernobyl but still outside the exclusion zone. We stopped in the countryside and the guide got a geiger counter out and stuck it down to the soil. It went off the scale !!!!! Now I dont know what scale he had it set at, but he was alarmed enough to get us all back in and turned around and head back from whence we had come.
Even in the market where we wanted to buy food for our hosts they warned us not to as so much of it was radioactive.

Of course, if you want to read a book by the light shining from your glowing testicles.....feel free
I really want to see Pripyat and, like I said, I've been tossing it around for a few years. "Extreme tourism" is one thing, but I don't feel like dying, either. The current Ukrainian government doesn't mind, they just make you sign 400 waivers.

It's just another ghost town like the 100's in California with their own attendant dangers.

As long as you don't leave the pavement, don't inhale clouds of dust, fondle metallic objects, etc, you're fine.

Well.... and don't stay for longer than 8 hours. No campouts or cross-country hiking trips, that's for sure.

Parts of the forest still glow red at night.

The big problem as we found out, was that the exclusion zone simply isnt big enough.

[Chorlton]

You still haven't answered my question from page one chorlton.
Who the fuck are you talking about? This child wants to know.

Its your drug addled brain that simply cant comprehend English.
What I'm saying is that all those greens who one opposed Nuclear, are now supporting it as they hate the alternatves in their back gardens.
Theyve done a U Turn

Clear?

[Cogburn]

The big problem as we found out, was that the exclusion zone simply isnt big enough.
There was a scifi video game called STALKER that came out a few years ago that was based inside the Exclusion Zone. It used mutated animals as the "monsters".

Then, two years ago photos like this started to surface.

This photo is reported to be a dog born within 5 miles outside the Exclusion Zone in the Ukraine.
http://www.instablogsimages.com/images/2009/10/04/dog-mutant-insta-ukraine_O5EHW_16920.jpg

This is a stillborn fetus from Ekaterinburg, according to Pravda.
http://english.pravda.ru/img/idb/mutant.jpg
http://english.pravda.ru/science/earth/106200-0/

Fallout from Cherny has only just begun to settle.

[skunk]

Chorlton, what greens are you talking about? The green party? Some guy on tv?

You gotta be a bit more specific buddy, I'm not high. I may be retarded, but I'm not on drugs.

[mojo]

Chorlton, what greens are you talking about?

Is this the green party? You gotta be specific buddy, I'm not high. I may be retarded, but I'm not on drugs.

greens, treehuggers, eco terrorists, dolphin dolly's, rent-a-protester, dole bludgers.
greenpeacer's who joined because it was "the in thing".

[skunk]

Ah general bias against pseudo-environmentalists, ok. That's fine.

[boycotteverything]

Chorlton, what greens are you talking about? The green party? Some guy on tv?

You gotta be a bit more specific buddy, I'm not high. I may be retarded, but I'm not on drugs.
Here's what he said:
What I'm saying is that all those greens who once opposed Nuclear, are now supporting it

That's the broadest of broad brush painting. There are greenies who now support nuclear power. No denying that. But there is a further, and I'd guess larger, faction that supports conservation and green, even Luddite, alternatives. The conundrum of nuclear waste disposal is still unsolved and may pose an existential threat to civilization according to the conservation faction. I throw in with that group. My view is that we need only a small fraction of the energy produced to lead productive and thoughtful lives. And the world would require even less than that fraction if it had the courage to listen to that ominous wail from the past- Thomas Malthus. Humanity stands at the edge of a profound precipice- a final choice. We can either choose to be free of the shackles of abject consumption or we can at last choose to devour the host like a viral infection.

[mojo]

The conundrum of nuclear waste disposal

send it to the moon to power the soul catcher.

[skunk]

I thought it was powered by human souls?

[mojo]

I thought it was powered by human souls?

i'm sure they get hungry.

[boycotteverything]

it's obvious that this issue is really not taken seriously here. too bad.

[skunk]

If I didn't take this seriously do you think I'd be harassing chorlton for an answer?

[boycotteverything]

because you've got time on your hands?

[skunk]

Don't we all.

[boycotteverything]

yep

[Chorlton]

Chorlton, what greens are you talking about? The green party? Some guy on tv?

You gotta be a bit more specific buddy, I'm not high. I may be retarded, but I'm not on drugs.

Fuck me you dont get out much do you.
Thick as two fucking planks

[Chorlton]

because you've got time on your hands?

No its because he is a doped up illiterate cunt

[boycotteverything]

OK. Point well taken- but let's have this discussion:


Chorlton, what greens are you talking about? The green party? Some guy on tv?

You gotta be a bit more specific buddy, I'm not high. I may be retarded, but I'm not on drugs.
Here's what he said:
What I'm saying is that all those greens who once opposed Nuclear, are now supporting it

That's the broadest of broad brush painting. There are greenies who now support nuclear power. No denying that. But there is a further, and I'd guess larger, faction that supports conservation and green, even Luddite, alternatives. The conundrum of nuclear waste disposal is still unsolved and may pose an existential threat to civilization according to the conservation faction. I throw in with that group. My view is that we need only a small fraction of the energy produced to lead productive and thoughtful lives. And the world would require even less than that fraction if it had the courage to listen to that ominous wail from the past- Thomas Malthus. Humanity stands at the edge of a profound precipice- a final choice. We can either choose to be free of the shackles of abject consumption or we can at last choose to devour the host like a viral infection.

[Chorlton]

Theres little to discuss. Telling people to use less wont work as people have been indoctrinated into using all the house machinery we now have. The only way would be to have a cutout installed on each house, that cuts off the electricity after a certain useage.

My comments about the Green U Turn was made after a discussion on TV with some Greens who were totally opposed to Nuclear back in the 70's and 80' and they are now advocating Nuclear even over windpower.

[boycotteverything]

The only way would be to have a cutout installed on each house, that cuts off the electricity after a certain useage.sign me up.

[skunk]

My comments about the Green U Turn was made after a discussion on TV with some Greens who were totally opposed to Nuclear back in the 70's and 80' and they are now advocating Nuclear even over windpower.

Thank you for answering my question after the 5th time.

[Chorlton]

I'm sorry you failed to understand my original post

I'll type in Braille next time.

[boycotteverything]

what was the question?

[Chorlton]

what was the question?
As promised

. .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . .. . . . .
. . .. . .. .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. .. . . . . . . .. .. . .. . . . .. . . .. . ..
. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .

[boycotteverything]

oh, that question. sorry i missed it.

[Bitchkoma]

My comments about the Green U Turn was made after a discussion on TV with some Greens who were totally opposed to Nuclear back in the 70's and 80' and they are now advocating Nuclear even over windpower.

Silly Chorlton, they're politicians. Of course they sway to where the wind blows. Or reactors in this case.

[skunk]

You don't "dispose" of nuclear "waste", dumbass.

You bury it?


You make more nuclear fuel out of it through something called "reprocessing". Google is your friend.

Actually I learned about reusing spent "fuel" in human ecology back in college, but thanks for the refresher.

[Cogburn]

I see, you would just ignore facts to support your argument.

Planning on starting a thread about reptilians for your next trick?

[skunk]

What facts am I ignoring? No need to get hostile, pick up that bong next to you or something geez.

[captainkiwi]

What puzzles me is.
They can make nice little Nuclear reactors for Warships and subs.
Why dont they just make lots of small Nuclear generating stations around the country for large cities or Towns, instead of fewer, bigger ones?
Got to remember Chorlton you dealing with the world wide ideocacy .......why not build your own ....... could be fun and profitable :lol:
and you should be wise to the fact that the greens are a bunch of hand ringing wankers.......
5]pUcvtm7fm405]

[Cogburn]

What facts am I ignoring? No need to get hostile, pick up that bong next to you or something geez.
All information regarding the stockpiling of spent nuclear fuel is propaganda. There is no such thing as nuclear "waste".

It is not being "disposed of" or "buried": it is being stockpiled.

The fact that the only reason the United States buries its waste is because we are stockpiling it for some unknown purpose. There is no need to stockpile it because it can all be reused if properly reprocessed. Breeder reactors just make that process easier, not possible.

If that nuclear "waste" was so utterly useless, why do we care if the Iranians give it to the French or Russians? Why don't we just let them keep it for themselves?

Because you can still do shit with it... like make bombs.

[boycotteverything]

Because you can still do shit with it... like make bombs.i'd call that pretty much of a waste.

[skunk]

All information regarding the stockpiling of spent nuclear fuel is propaganda. There is no such thing as nuclear "waste".

If all information regarding spent nuclear fuel is propaganda, how can I trust you?

Nuclear Waste and Breeder Reactors - Myth and Promise (http://argee.net/DefenseWatch/Nuclear%20Waste%20and%20Breeder%20Reactors.htm)

Propaganda?

[boycotteverything]

nuclear waste is a fucking disaster and always will be.

[captainkiwi]

All information regarding the stockpiling of spent nuclear fuel is propaganda. There is no such thing as nuclear "waste".

If all information regarding spent nuclear fuel is propaganda, how can I trust you?

Nuclear Waste and Breeder Reactors - Myth and Promise (http://argee.net/DefenseWatch/Nuclear%20Waste%20and%20Breeder%20Reactors.htm)

Propaganda?
we can't trust the flag wavers....... boarder lines....... or anyone for that matter....... not even you skunk ....yet no more trust worthy that the nuclear waste pouring for cogs lips .....maybe we could sue him for having such a narrow perspective a and a paranoid mind......
b]zsTRxXvQY0sb]
ah fuck it.......... put this in your pipe cog........ and by pipe I mean ya exhaust pipe :lol:

[Cogburn]

The underlined is the part of that article that is disinformation bullshit, and it is upon such bullshit that the rest of the article revolves. I include it in context.
[offsite:hy1w11k4]In order to see how this can be done, it's first necessary to review some basic physics: Plutonium-239 produces significantly more energy than Uranium-235. And the process continues to produce the additional isotopes Plutonium-240 and 241 and 242. This raises an interesting question.

Can we take these fuel rods that contain all this Plutonium, separate out the Plutonium and whatever Uranium was not used, and make more fuel rods? You bet. In fact, we actually end up with more fuel after the process than what we started with. Why is this not being done?

Plutonium is used in atomic bombs - the fact that it's pure Plutonium-239 that makes an atomic bomb work, and not the other three isotopes, apparently didn't matter, because in 1977 President Jimmy Carter signed an executive order that banned the reprocessing of nuclear fuel in the United States. The rationale was that the Plutonium could possibly be stolen, and terrorists might be able to use it to make atomic bombs.

Never mind that in the real world, it is essentially impossible to separate out the Plutonium-239 from the other isotopes in sufficient purity to use it for bomb making. The British tried it, the Russians tried it, the French tried it, and we tried it, but nobody did it very well, even though we had the best scientists and all the money in the world to throw at it.

How do we get the Plutonium-239 for our atomic bombs? We built reactors fueled with Uranium-238 whose only job is to create Plutonium-239. These systems are some of the best-guarded plants in the world. Our weapons grade Plutonium is safe. And we use the stuff over and over and over, as necessary, to keep our supply of weapons grade Plutonium up to date and available.[/offsite:hy1w11k4]
The underlined portion is a statement derived from pure ignorance.

The truth is Pu-240, Pu-241, and Pu-242 are all suitable for power generation in a system called a "fast neutronic reactor," and the technology has been around since the late 60's.

But hey... let's not overlook the other gem of a line in your article.

[offsite:hy1w11k4]...in 1977 President Jimmy Carter signed an executive order that banned the reprocessing of nuclear fuel in the United States. The rationale was that the Plutonium could possibly be stolen, and terrorists might be able to use it to make atomic bombs.[/offsite:hy1w11k4]

It's all about making bomb material efficiently: reusing it as nuclear fuel isn't a problem, and no breeder reactors required.

The author of the article is so close, and yet so far.

Education > Parroted Propaganda

[zzboc]

Removed.

Hah.

[mojo]

smite for you muthafucka.

nice post.

[zzboc]

smite for you muthafucka.

nice post.
It's C0bzz (Cobzz) here. I would use my old username but I lost the password and the password retrieve function on this website seems to be broken.

[mojo]

the password retrieve function on this website seems to be broken.

either that or your broken. (possibly because the staff function of this site is broken or apathetic).

doesn't matter either way. :D



hows it goin mate.

[boycotteverything]

EDIT: I also see disrespect in the earlier pages of this thread. Treat me in a respectful way or you will not get a reply, nor have an intelligent discussion. OK. Go fuck yourself. How'm I doin?

[boycotteverything]

All of these asinine apologists for nuclear power avoid the greater truth. The world already produces probably four times more energy than it requires. What's now required is not more power to sustain a civilization that is clearly unstainable but rather a wise use of the resources already available. Turn down the lights, stop producing and consuming useless shit, use your legs and not your car. The argument for nukes ignore the root cause of the world's dilemma- the Malthusian Garrote of over-population. That's the real issue that needs to be addressed- not just trivial reforms in the means of consuming the planet. And then of course there's the twin evil of capitalism to deal with. It's a system that requires the viral growth of industry and consumption and planetary despoliation in the name of profit. You 'energy mavens' are confronting the wrong issues. The solutions begin with a boycott of everything, a general strike against assholery and destructive behavior. Lacking that- we're fucked.

[Alessandra]

Where's our zero point energy :roll:

[boycotteverything]

it's up your magyk ass.

[Alessandra]

you lose, good day sir.

[boycotteverything]

what- you expect a better answer from Dr. Greer?

[hp]

Treat me in a respectful way or you will not get a reply

Note: You are posting on Amkon. Please review site history and the No Terms and Conditions. Your results may vary.

I tend to side with BE and believe we should throttle all this consumption back. Of course it will require people to think in a different way about life, a difficult task.

Wondering how much resource is used in making, promoting and selling even one Shamwow.

[zzboc]

Then we are fucked then because what you have posted is a sheer fantasy that will never, ever happen. Energy requirements continue to increase in the developed world, and exponentially increase in the developing world. Total electrical requirements are set increase by 50% by the year 2030, most of which will be catered to by fossil fuels. It would be a massive undertaking to even pause that growth, but even then the 20 trillion kilowatt hours (per year) required won't magically disappear. Besides, Nuclear needs less materials than solar and wind while being cheaper than both.

Why isn't Nuclear sustainable?


The world already produces probably four times more energy than it requires.
Than it requires? For what? Elaborate.


Turn down the lights, stop producing and consuming useless shit, use your legs and not your car.
And.... how will that shut down the one coal plant being built per week in China? How will it shut down the baseload plants we already have?

IT CANT.

Also, we need 20 trillion kilowatt hours (per year) today. Where will be get 5 trillion kilowatt hours then? Thin air I presume? Will turning down our lights somehow eliminate 75% of our energy requirement? Will any of that stop development in the third world?


And then of course there's the twin evil of capitalism to deal with.
LOL. Honestly I really, really, don't care what your opinion on capitalism is.

[hp]

So the solution is full speed ahead into oblivion.

I worked in the energy business, a good bit of it was to assure that a select few made outragious money. Remember Enron.

[Chorlton]

so the solution is full speed ahead into oblivion.

I worked in the energy business, a good bit of it was to assure that a select few made outragious money. Remember enron.

warning

imminent thread derailment sensed

[Alessandra]

CHOO CHOO
http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/0903/derailed-train-derailed-thread-demotivational-poster-1237346157.jpg

[zzboc]

So the solution is full speed ahead into oblivion.
Nuclear is not full speed into oblivion.

[hp]

Really, why should I even care. My life will end and the children of today and their children will be the ones who are in trouble.

May be I should be using as much of the resources as I can, isn't that the American way.

[hp]

I am referring to the idea that resource conservation isn't part of the picture. Just make more capacity.

[zzboc]

If you are for resource conservation then go right ahead. I agree.


However that won't stop our need for electricity.

[hp]

Look at the fine folks in California. They seem to think they have a god given right to all the power they can use, gripe if it isn't there for a cheap price but do not want power plants in their state.

[boycotteverything]

HP- forget it. You can't argue with a fool who thinks we 'need' all this power we piss away. He misses the entire point. Conserving the earth is the most productive all endeavor. Douche bags will never understand that.

[zzboc]

I take that as, "I can't".


So let's go into your dreamworld then. Where will be get 5 trillion kilowatt hours of electricity then? That's a quarter of current.

Better turn off your computer, also. Conserving electricity is evidently more important than talking to "douche bags" like myself.

[boycotteverything]

I take that as, "I can't".


So let's go into your dreamworld then. Where will be get 5 trillion kilowatt hours of electricity then? That's a quarter of current.

Better turn off your computer, also. Conserving electricity is evidently more important than talking to "douche bags" like myself.from the wind from the sea from the sun. it's a zero sum game for me.

[Chorlton]

I'm investing in Nuclear

[boycotteverything]

would we expect less from a limey pole smoker who's mean to Chii? i rather think not. meet me at high noon at the tip. this is serious shit.

[Chorlton]

Sorry no can do, its my turn on the bicycle generator charging up the battery
Eastenders is on tonight

[boycotteverything]

and here i was, saving my nickles for a trip to England so we could stake out Boscombe Downs together. well that fantasy is over.

[zzboc]

from the wind from the sea from the sun. it's a zero sum game for me.

Then you obviously don't know the disadvantages of Wind, Tidal and Solar.

http://i47.tinypic.com/33lphsi.jpg

Wind, Tidal, and Solar are also idealogical fantasies that will soon be over.

It is impossible to run the world on such a poor energy supply due to a low capacity factor, intermittency, high transmission costs, no-load following, low energy density, high cost, and a large amount of material required for construction.


I'm investing in Nuclear
With more people like Boycotteverything, don't. Invest in natural gas.

[boycotteverything]

Shit, man- he doesn't ever take my investment advice anyway.

[zzboc]

May I ask why your thinking is the usual extension of 1960s Luddite flower power thinking? Is your solution to the energy crisis a world whereby everyone spends their time assembling by the thousands in a mud hole, smoking drugs, performing lewd acts, and making random noise? Why is more electrical energy bad?

Please don't give me some idealogical babble from your long dead heroes like you usually give. Quoting someone who died 150 years ago would show how out of touch with reality you really are.

[Chorlton]

world whereby everyone spends their time assembling by the thousands in a mud hole, smoking drugs, performing lewd acts, and making random noise?
.

You've got to love Glastonbury though :)

[zzboc]

A nice picture...:

http://i45.tinypic.com/2ijhpah.jpg
http://i49.tinypic.com/vhfaqa.png

That shit's peer reviewed, btw.

[boycotteverything]

May I ask why your thinking is the usual extension of 1960s Luddite flower power thinking?

Please don't give me some idealogical babble from your long dead heroes like you usually give. Quoting someone who died 150 years ago would show how out of touch with reality you really are.
Sure you ask 'why.' The answer is because I am a 1960's Luddite. I hate capitalism, energy corporations, war, racism, gratuitous consumption, abject greed, and meaningless work. I believe in husbanding and preserving the earth and I love children and small animals. None of that is ideological, it's Beatitudinal. I believe that a willful approach to life is self defeating. Next question...

[hp]

Quoting someone who died 150 years ago would show how out of touch with reality you really are.

That imples that any wisdom from a person who dies just goes away, becomes invalid or not worth using.

I bet some knowledge used in those nuclear reactors is from people who are no longer alive. Wouldn't that be a good reason to be suspect of nuclear power.

[boycotteverything]

That imples that any wisdom from a person who dies just goes away, becomes invalid or not worth using.Kinda renders us all just disposable accidents of history, doesn't it? Some of our forebears can offer us useful commentary not just on life, per se, but on quality life. I suggest that this douchebag crack a book on occasion.

[century]

If everyone became self sufficient, at least at home, you wouldn't need rations(BE you fucking socialist), which brings up another question. Why do we need a Gov. run public school system that doesn't teach half the truth about the real world anyway, lets all home school so we can teach our kids what they really need to know to make good decisions. God forbid anybody be able to do any more than the minuscule paperwork or operate the machines at the factories in which we wouldn't need the jobs anyway if we didn't have to pay the energy bill every month.

Instead of forcing people to use rations, or depend on someone else, alls IM saying is utilize the incentive for people to do it themselves and make a choice.

Make people get off their fat ass. Because if they have to put their own labor into it we wouldn't have this problem, ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for it.

Survival of the fittest/intelligent

[boycotteverything]

(BE you fucking socialist commie)fixt

[century]

fixt


your joking rite :o

[boycotteverything]

The holy trinity

http://amkon2.net/image.php?u=949&dateline=1258944436

[eris]

I've homeschooled for about a year and I love it.

My kid just told me Alexander Hamilton must have been a reptilian alien because he was for centralized government. I would hate to miss great moments like that.