Nuclear Power: The Options

[John am Rhein]

Do you want to grow two heads and have your skin fall off in scaly lumps

 

Or not?

[Paul B]

Do you want to grow two heads and have your skin fall off in scaly lumps

 

Or not?

1130671[/snapback]

 

 

No, I want cheap energy that will not cause greehouse gasses in the short time me and mine are on this planet? What have you got for me?

[John am Rhein]

No, I want cheap energy that will not cause greehouse gasses in the short time me and mine are on this planet?  What have you got for me?

1130675[/snapback]

 

Tsunami-driven turbines on the moons of Jupiter with the resulting power beamed to earth by a giant laser.

[Paul B]

Tsunami-driven turbines on the moons of Jupiter with the resulting power beamed to earth by a giant laser.

1130689[/snapback]

 

 

Why didn't you say so. Sign me up for that right away!

[boohog]

Do you want to grow two heads and have your skin fall off in scaly lumps

 

Or not?

1130671[/snapback]

 

I thought the latter skin falling off point was what would happen if we carried on with fossil fuels?

[John am Rhein]

I thought the latter skin falling off point was what would happen if we carried on with fossil fuels?

1130705[/snapback]

 

So you're for scaly lumps, then?

[McBain]

 

It'll grow back

[John am Rhein]

Few seem to be impressed by the advantages of an extra head.

[stressederic]

Few seem to be impressed by the advantages of an extra head.

1130731[/snapback]

 

To be honest its pretty rubbish as far as radioactive super powers go.

 

What are you going to do in the face of those with super strength or powers of flight?

 

Talk inccessantly? Blow up two balloons?

[New York Red]

Nuclear power seems to be one of many evils as far as power supply is concerned.

 

It has now been 20 years since Chernobyl and 25 years since Three Mile Island. Technology has changed drastically since then even without any focus on making nuclear energy better. I think that nuclear energy can be used safely far more safely than in the past and should be looked at for a revival.

 

What I am extremely concerned about is greenhouse gases. Coal burning and oil burning plants emit masses of greenhouse gases and it needs to be curtailed immediately, not to mention the wanton use of it in industry and in vehicles. This whole issue needs a massive rethink and the Bush administration needs to change their attitude to do something about this (they won't, best hope is to change in 2008).

 

However, solar, geothermal, tidal, hydro and wind all needs to be developed in an efficient and authoritarian manner. There's no reason why every windy area in isolated places doesn't have turbines generating power. Tidal would be massive if done right. Places like the Bristol Channel and the Bay of Fundy have gigantic capacities. There is no reason why ever house in Europe and America doesn't have south facing solar panels to generate hot water thus saving them money and saving the world's resources.

 

I'd go hard after nuclear fusion too. That's what will ultimately provide a solution to all our needs.

[libero]

I just started work a couple of weeks ago on a prototype offshore windfarm thingy.

 

Windfarm

 

If it is successful they reckon there could be an order for over 200 of the buggers. Its gonna take us 7 months to make 2 of the Jackets, dont know how long the windmill itself takes? , so if there is a big order like that it will keep me in work for a good few years, so if anyne wants to write to there MP and insist we use wind power all the better for me

Edited December 29, 2005 by libero

[Guest Jack Bauer]

The only bad thing about nuclear is the waste that it produces. Only reason stuff like Chernobyl happened was due to silly experiements by the operators. People say terrorists could fly a plane into them, but that wouldn't cause any sort of nuclear explosion and minimal fallout.

[surf]

Wind is an unreliable source of energy though. You cant store energy, so if there's lots of wind there's lots of energy congesting the net. For that reason you can only have a small percentage of your energy need from wind farms. They aren't the ultimate solution.

[fyds]

Wind is an unreliable source of energy though. You cant store energy, so if there's lots of wind there's lots of energy congesting the net. For that reason you can only have a small percentage of your energy need from wind farms. They aren't the ultimate solution.

1130852[/snapback]

You should try telling them that all over Northern Europe then as the place is full of them and they work bloody well. The storage problem is now also more or less defunct as they are installing three-cycle generators - and very little wind is needed to power these turbines.

[surf]

The scandinavians have lots of hydropower though, they use their surpluss wind energy to pump water from a low lever reservoir to a high level reservoir. They can then regain this energy when they want.

 

We don't have this storage capability on Holland, the Germans dont have it either. This summer we almost suffered major problems, when heavy winds produced overcapacity in the north of Germany, which flooded our energy grids, very nearly leading to shutdowns.

 

There's still a lot of challenges to overcome before wind energy takes a much larger role (at least in Holland and Germany).

[fyds]

The scandinavians have lots of hydropower though, they use their surpluss wind energy to pump water from a low lever reservoir to a high level reservoir. They can then regain this energy when they want.

 

We don't have this storage capability on Holland, the Germans dont have it either. This summer we almost suffered major problems, when heavy winds produced overcapacity in the north of Germany, which flooded our energy grids, very nearly leading to shutdowns.

 

There's still a lot of challenges to overcome before wind energy takes a much larger role (at least in Holland and Germany).

1130865[/snapback]

Oddly enough, I was talking about Holland as one of my wife's uncles (Kees) is a turbine station manager! (Gelderland)

[Guest Jack Bauer]

if you wanted to replace all of the UK's energy for wind, you'd have to find a vast, many miles wide park that would need run the whole of the islands coast.Tthe power generated is only proportionate to the third power of the wind speed so is only producing like 15-20 percent of what it should. Well, thats what I remember from investigating alternate power sources *nod*

[John am Rhein]

To be honest its pretty rubbish as far as radioactive super powers go.

 

What are you going to do in the face of those with super strength or powers of flight?

 

Talk inccessantly? Blow up two balloons?

1130802[/snapback]

 

Clearly what we need is a kryptonite reprocessing plant.

Posts merged:

One of the key problems with various alternative energy sources is that they are not available 'on demand' - solar power needs the sun to shine, wind power needs the wind to blow, etc. - and so far there hasn't been an efficient means of energy storage devised which would enable us to accumulate the energy and call on it when needed.

 

Pumping reservior water to a higher level - as Surf said - is one means of doing this, of course, but it's only practical for places with very large amounts of reservoir space (and water, of course).

 

I reckon one approach which could eventually prove useful could be burning fossil fuels (e.g. coal), but without emitting the resulting gases, i.e. store the gases somehow. The intermittently available energy sources (solar, wind, etc.) could then be used to somehow chemically transform the carbon dioxide in these gases into some more manageable form (perhaps even something which is a 'fossil fuel' itself) rather than storing ever increasing quantities of gas indefinitely.

[Guest Anders Honoré]

what's wrong with shipping our radioactive waste into space?

[John am Rhein]

what's wrong with shipping our radioactive waste into space?

1131397[/snapback]

 

The cost would be very high, I assume.

[Kvarme Ate My Food]

what's wrong with shipping our radioactive waste into space?

1131397[/snapback]

 

think about how often rockets explode during or soon after take-off

 

then imagine that happening to one filled with nuclear waste

[Spion kop]

radioactive waste is so easy to deal with ......dump it in the sea sure we create godzila but lifes full of risks.

[Frosty Jack]

think about how often rockets explode during or soon after take-off

 

then imagine that happening to one filled with nuclear waste

1131440[/snapback]

 

Nonsense, the waste would be safely insulated with convicts and the unemployed surely?

[boohog]

I'd go hard after nuclear fusion too. That's what will ultimately provide a solution to all our needs.

1130825[/snapback]

 

You do know that nuclear fusion creates radioactive waste too? Not as much, sure, but nasty all the same.

Posts merged:

think about how often rockets explode during or soon after take-off

 

then imagine that happening to one filled with nuclear waste

1131440[/snapback]

 

With the nuimber of rockets you'd need, I think that the disposal of the waste into space would start to have amaterial impact on the environment.

[Guest Anders Honoré]

radioactive waste is so easy to deal with ......dump it in the sea sure we create godzila but lifes full of risks.

1131496[/snapback]

 

i am with you.