You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Alternative Fuels May Be Postponed.... Again????
- Thread starter libertad
- Start date
There's too much Money tied up in Fossil Fuels.
The Government isn't about to unleash free(er) energy and destroy tens of trillions in proven assets.
Special Interests Rule and they won't allow it.
The Government isn't about to unleash free(er) energy and destroy tens of trillions in proven assets.
Special Interests Rule and they won't allow it.
Quote from jem:
i read the articles...
I am not totally anti nuke - but those were propaganda.
safe, clean and cheap?
safe - prove it to me...
clean.. not until we neutralize the waste
cheap - not until we quantify the costs...
better?
Safe? Look at Navy Carriers. They obviously deem it safe enough for use.
Quote from Ivanovich:
You guys got it all wrong. What we need now is a virus to kill off 60% of the world's population. All technological aspects of the planet will be fully in tact and then we just have to mandate no more than 2 children per family. We'll be fine.
Lets start with your wife & kids.
Oh, you didn't mean to include your family in that 60% reduction did you.
Quote from clacy:
Because nuclear power plants do not burn fuel, they do not emit combustion by-products. By substituting for other fuels in electricity production, nuclear energy has significantly reduced U.S. and global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), the chief greenhouse gas.
n Between 1973 and 1999, U.S. nuclear power plants reduced cumulative emissions of nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxideâpollutants controlled under the Clean Air Actâby 31.6 million tons and 61.7 million tons, respectively. Over this same period, the nation's nuclear plants reduced the cumulative amount of carbon emissions by 2.61 billion tons of carbon. In 1999 alone, U.S. nuclear plants prevented the discharge of 168 million metric tons of carbon into the atmosphere.
n Worldwide, about 430 nuclear power plants reduced the world's emissions of CO2 by about 500 million metric tons of carbon during 1997, the latest year for which data is available. In many countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, nuclear energy helped reduceâthat is, mitigate the increase ofâcarbon emissions per capita.
n Environmental responsibility is an important part of nuclear power plant management. Plants are designed, built and regulated to prevent radioactive emissions. And nuclear power plants voluntarily work to protect nearby wildlife and their habitats.
n Nuclear power plants produce relatively small amounts of used fuel and low-level waste. The management, packaging, transportation and disposal of this waste is strictly regulated and carefully controlled by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and Department of Transportation.
You're definitely a little slow.
Ever hear about radioactive waste?
There still is no real solution for spent fuel rods. They just keep being moved around. With increased nuclear power growth, you can guarantee an accident happening soon.
Quote from Hydroblunt:
You're definitely a little slow.
Ever hear about radioactive waste?
There still is no real solution for spent fuel rods. They just keep being moved around. With increased nuclear power growth, you can guarantee an accident happening soon.
Just launch it all into space.
Quote from Ivanovich:
Just launch it all into space.
Yeah, except that objects in space sometimes fall back to Earth. I don't think that a man-made radioactive meteorite would be a very good thing. Not to mention the cost of that. They are going to have to find a safe way of recycling/reusing the waste in some form. I don't think that storage or disposal is a very good solution either.