04-06-2009, 08:41 PM | #1 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 44,748
Karma: 55645321
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Peru
Device: Kindle: Oasis 3, Voyage WiFi; Kobo: Libra 2, Aura One
|
Will more nuclear power plants be built?
The construction of nuclear power plants has virtually stopped, due to regulatory redtape, safety issues, and world economies.
In the UK, I read that their government is in favor of privately built plants, although it seems uncertain that any one group will engage in such an undertaking. Construction in the U.S. stalled in the 1970s. One website concludes with this comment: "Some analysts argue that the stagnation of the nuclear-power industry should be attributed primarily to economics, rather than to political opposition." http://science.jrank.org/pages/4745/...-concerns.html There are safety concerns, and there will always be safety concerns. The major accident in the U.S. - Three Mile Island - occurred in 1979. Perhaps the most famous accident was at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant near Kiev in the Ukraine, where the top of the containment building blew off. That was in 1986. I'm just wondering if nuclear power is a feasible alternative anymore, considering cost, political opposition, and danger. Don |
04-06-2009, 08:50 PM | #2 |
Sir Penguin of Edinburgh
Posts: 12,375
Karma: 23555235
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: DC Metro area
Device: Shake a stick plus 1
|
I wish they would build more nuke plants. Even though it pollutes, it's the most cost effective long term power source.
|
Advert | |
|
04-06-2009, 09:14 PM | #3 |
Wizard
Posts: 3,442
Karma: 300001
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Belgium
Device: PRS-500/505/700, Kindle, Cybook Gen3, Words Gear
|
It's a pretty well-known that coal plants produce more radioactive pollution than nuclear ones.
|
04-06-2009, 09:59 PM | #4 |
cybershark
Posts: 314
Karma: 2227
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: AZ
Device: none
|
nuclear power if really very green power. given who is in power I don't think it will happen.
nuclear is still the best power we know of so far. and now that there are more safe guards. I think it is one of most safe form of power right now. (save attack on the power plant even then as I under sand it unlike to do much damage.). |
04-06-2009, 10:15 PM | #5 | |
curmudgeon
Posts: 1,481
Karma: 5748190
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Redwood City, CA USA
Device: Kobo Aura HD, (ex)nook, (ex)PRS-700, (ex)PRS-500
|
Quote:
As for Chernobyl, it's completely incorrect to say that "the top of the containment building blew off." Soviet plants flat out didn't have a containment vessel in the sense that US plants do! What blew off was the top of the (completely ordinary) building housing the plant. There's a HUGE difference between those statements. As for the danger, I observe that the death toll from nuclear power is a pittance compared to the death toll from coal. And that's assuming the most pessimistic estimates of long-term deaths from Chernobyl actually pan out. Coal mining is dangerous, coal is very dirty, and the air pollution it produces is really nasty stuff. And that doesn't even consider CO2 emissions possibly contributing to global warming! I'll take nuclear in a heartbeat -- as long as the plants weren't designed or constructed in the Worker's Paradise, that is. Xenophon Last edited by Xenophon; 04-06-2009 at 10:29 PM. Reason: added observation about greenhouse gasses |
|
Advert | |
|
04-06-2009, 10:26 PM | #6 |
curmudgeon
Posts: 1,481
Karma: 5748190
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Redwood City, CA USA
Device: Kobo Aura HD, (ex)nook, (ex)PRS-700, (ex)PRS-500
|
While I'm at it, note that nuclear waste should be a complete non-issue. Yucca mountain is a wasteful boondoggle. The French have developed a dandy technology for handling radioactive waste. The layman's description is this:
In addition to all those benefits, it also allows for recovery of the radioactive material (by reprocessing the glass billets) should it become sensible to do so. But that recovery would be extremely obvious, so it poses no significant security issue. I have no clue why we're too dumb to use this solution here in the US. Perhaps there's too much political capital tied up in the current non-solution? Xenophon |
04-06-2009, 10:30 PM | #7 |
curmudgeon
Posts: 1,481
Karma: 5748190
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Redwood City, CA USA
Device: Kobo Aura HD, (ex)nook, (ex)PRS-700, (ex)PRS-500
|
Why is the Soviet lack of containment vessels a big deal? The easy explanation is this: a Chernobyl style accident at a US plant (or a French plant, for that matter) would be terrifically expensive -- and would release no more radiation than TMI did. That's what that big-*ss reinforced concrete dome is for! The non-Soviet world has done a far far better job of safety than did the Soviets.
Xenophon |
04-07-2009, 02:15 AM | #8 |
Dry fruit
Posts: 1,157
Karma: 1047086
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Paris, France
Device: Bookeen Opus + HTC Desire HD
|
|
04-07-2009, 02:42 AM | #9 | |
eBook Enthusiast
Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383043
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
Quote:
|
|
04-07-2009, 02:43 AM | #10 |
Wizard
Posts: 1,279
Karma: 1002683
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: New York
Device: PRS-700
|
Im pro-nuclear from what i hear about the arguments, its Safe, Its cheap (i heard that is 6x cheaper than Wind and Solar on Bill Maher on friday) and it is Green.
why there are not solar cells on everything besides calculators yet i dont really understand. Its Expencive they cry... Im sure if factories are built for it, instead of tickle me elmos and Iphones, Solar will be cheap. |
04-07-2009, 02:44 AM | #11 | |
eBook Enthusiast
Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383043
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
Quote:
The next generation of UK nuclear plant will almost certainly be built by EDF (Electricity de France). France generates around 70% of its electricity from nuclear power (compared with around 20% in the UK), and EDF are the most experienced company in the world at constructing nuclear power stations. |
|
04-07-2009, 02:45 AM | #12 |
eBook Enthusiast
Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383043
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
For one thing, the production of solar cells is not exactly an "environmentally friendly" process; they contain all sorts of highly toxic substances, like cadmium.
|
04-07-2009, 04:19 AM | #13 | ||
Dry fruit
Posts: 1,157
Karma: 1047086
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Paris, France
Device: Bookeen Opus + HTC Desire HD
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
04-07-2009, 04:45 AM | #14 |
eBook Enthusiast
Posts: 85,544
Karma: 93383043
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
|
|
04-07-2009, 10:05 AM | #15 |
Beepbeep n beebeep, yeah!
Posts: 11,726
Karma: 8255450
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: La Crosse, Wisconsin, aka America's IceBox
Device: iThingie, KmkII, I miss Zelda!
|
There is a part of West Virginia that is on fire and will be on fire for about a century as the coal reserves under ground are burnt up. It is releasing CO2 as we speak. A fire started in a deep mine and got out of control. The mining company tried flooding the mine, but there were too many holes and not enough water. They finally decided to abandon themine and let it burn.
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Aliens have deactivated British and US nuclear missiles, say US military pilots | TGS | Lounge | 14 | 09-29-2010 02:43 PM |
why no built in lights? | tapar | Which one should I buy? | 11 | 06-28-2010 03:07 AM |
mŏd'ə-rā'tər (n.): A substance placed in a nuclear reactor to slow neutrons down | vivaldirules | Lounge | 26 | 07-07-2009 03:13 PM |
Save $1558.00 on Nuclear Energy for the Kindle, Now only $6232.00 | Madam Broshkina | Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links) | 31 | 11-11-2008 11:25 AM |
New 'Nuclear Battery' Runs 10 Years, 10 Times More Powerful | Bob Russell | Lounge | 8 | 05-16-2005 03:22 PM |