Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > International affairs/politics  
View Poll Results: Do you think nuclear power is a necessity?
Yes, with the limited coal and natural resource, it is a necessity 62 72.09%
No, we need to look at other sources of energy 22 25.58%
I don't care 2 2.33%
Voters: 86. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 31.03.2011, 18:28
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 3,845
Groaned at 77 Times in 56 Posts
Thanked 4,103 Times in 2,212 Posts
rainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond reputerainer_d has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

Quote:
View Post
the disposal of nuclear waste is also a bit of a red herring. maybe we should just grind it down and disperse it into the atmosphere - that's what we do with every other kind of power generation...
Yep. But not a good idea with Pu.
There's a reason atmospheric nuke-tests were enventually stopped (in 1963 already).
Also, that way we (and the US) would also get the dirt from Russia, India etc.
While we have no problem exporting our dirt into 3rd-world countries, the reverse is not so popular here around ;-)
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 31.03.2011, 18:29
Deep Purple's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: England
Posts: 5,273
Groaned at 15 Times in 14 Posts
Thanked 5,284 Times in 2,568 Posts
Deep Purple has a reputation beyond reputeDeep Purple has a reputation beyond reputeDeep Purple has a reputation beyond reputeDeep Purple has a reputation beyond reputeDeep Purple has a reputation beyond reputeDeep Purple has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

Quote:
View Post
A scientist quoted some figures on the news today to show that nuclear energy is cleaner and causes less problems than some other forms of energy generation. I don't recall the specific figures.

If you take problems from coal mining, the smog from years gone by and other similar issues into consideration he may well have been correct.

When there is a problem with nuclear power it is almost certain to be a big one. The accidents and deaths as a result of other forms largely go unreported.

It is somewhat like comparing car accidents to air crashes.

I am not against nuclear power but feel that much more effort should be put into energy conservation and renewable energy first.
Quote:
View Post
In fact statisically speaking, nuclear power kills far fewer people than coal power. It kills far fwere people than oil. It kills far fewer people than gas. It is even safer than solar panels.

http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/07/sum...s-per-twh.html

That doesn't stop the greenies having a meltdown in their logic reactors though the moment the topic is mentioned.
This was the article that I was referring to earlier but couldn't find. Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 31.03.2011, 18:38
piazza's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Küsnacht ZH
Posts: 449
Groaned at 5 Times in 3 Posts
Thanked 271 Times in 128 Posts
piazza has made some interesting contributions
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

There's been some genuinely good advances in Fusion power recently. Check out the post I made earlier in this thread...
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 31.03.2011, 18:42
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,361
Groaned at 338 Times in 274 Posts
Thanked 26,263 Times in 11,000 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

Quote:
View Post
Probably true.
But having to leave the house you built for the next 5000 years is also quite a big impact, right?
I'd even be willing to bet that we will get very few direct casualities (and not many indirect) from the Fukushima "incident" - but that's no real consolation for the 200k that have to be relocated, right? After all, this is not the USSR where nobody owned houses and everything was provided by the state.
Granted, they still live - but so would we if we just stopped living in cloud-cuckoo-land and started to consume less energy.
Seeing 5 million lives have been saved by nuclear power since 1950, I suppose its even acceptable to evacuate 200K people once in 20 years.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 31.03.2011, 18:42
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

Quote:
View Post
And, for the record, I don't bet on fusion, either.
Fusion has its own set of problems (not the least of these is the fact that nuclear waste is generated there, too) and while the concept sounds great, there's no sure way to say if the reactors will be commerically viable one day - or at all.
It sure _sounds_ like a nice idea. But so do a lot of concepts around variations of "conventional" nuclear reactors (breeder reactor, THHTR etc.pp.).
I should say that I "believed" in fusion, too, at some point. That was when I was 13 or so and read about it in a popular-science books/mags.

Our "current lifestyle", as you put it, has been known to be unsustainable for over 40 years (Club of Rome anybody?).

If you check my old posts, I once wrote:
"Enjoy the party, while it lasts."
It seems, we've just gotten a noticeable bit closer to closing hour.
This shows how you do not understand nuclear fusion and it's by products and also the current state of the technology. There are x4 current methods they are attempting some with more success than others. It will take time to develop the containment materials and technology but it will come.

From the link I gave earlier.

The natural product of the fusion reaction is a small amount of helium, which is completely harmless to life. Of more concern is tritium, which, like other isotopes of hydrogen, is difficult to retain completely. During normal operation, some amount of tritium will be continually released.

Although tritium is volatile and biologically active, the health risk posed by a release is much lower than that of most radioactive contaminants, due to tritium's short half-life (12 years), very low decay energy (~14.95 keV), and the fact that it does not bioaccumulate (instead being cycled out of the body as water, with a biological half-life of 7 to 14 days).[26] Current ITER designs are investigating total containment facilities for any tritium.

Tritium can easily be bound to other elements and used in other applications elsewhere. It's not in the same ball park as current pollution from Nuclear fission. The amounts are miniscule.

Yup I agree we're all doomed I just hope we wake up and smell the coffee soon.

So turning off a few light bulbs we're all going to be saved? I think not the major consumers of energy is industry which means if you want goods/food on the shelves then you're still going to have to find the energy from somewhere.

Saving energy is not an option if we want to progress as human beings, by nature we will use more and more to develop. Now I'm not saying that people should waste energy, what I'm saying is that as tech increases so does energy usage. See industrial revolution (coal) to petrol/gas which obviously shows the more energy you get from a source the faster society develops.

I for one want to go forward not backwards.

Why aren't you camped outside every other chemical plant/pharmacuetical company/farmer complaining about them polluting the environment?

Nuclears easier to pick on it's in the news, and armed with the bbc/cnn version of events it's clear to see everyone knows all the implications of nuclear power.

Regardless of who pays for any mop ups it's irrelevent you WILL pay regardless of the method of energy production.

Lets not talk about all those nice govt subsidies green energy producers get.

Perhaps it's natures balance reassessing itself, the shit is coming and a lot of people will suffer, the choices are clear there are none, our thirst for energy will not stop and the greed of many dictates our path.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank for this useful post:
  #86  
Old 31.03.2011, 18:43
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,361
Groaned at 338 Times in 274 Posts
Thanked 26,263 Times in 11,000 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

Quote:
View Post
Yep. But not a good idea with Pu.
There's a reason atmospheric nuke-tests were enventually stopped (in 1963 already).
Also, that way we (and the US) would also get the dirt from Russia, India etc.
While we have no problem exporting our dirt into 3rd-world countries, the reverse is not so popular here around ;-)
We have no problem with the radioactive dirt from Chinese and Russian coal plants apparently.

remember, less nuclear = more coal.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #87  
Old 31.03.2011, 19:26
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

In India in villages we use cow dung power. Bio gas it is called. For the right price we will ship some shit to Europe to ease your power needs.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank for this useful post:
  #88  
Old 30.05.2011, 15:31
miss_bean's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 525
Groaned at 3 Times in 3 Posts
Thanked 464 Times in 224 Posts
miss_bean has an excellent reputationmiss_bean has an excellent reputationmiss_bean has an excellent reputationmiss_bean has an excellent reputation
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

Germany to go nuke free by 2022
Germany's ruling coalition has agreed to shut down all of the nation's nuclear power plants by 2022.
Minister of Ecology Norbert Roettgen of the Christian Democratic Union party made the announcement early Monday after negotiations with coalition partner, the Liberal Party, which had been opposed to setting a date for decommissioning the nuclear facilities.
Opposition parties have long supported shuttering nuclear energy in Germany

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe...ex.html?hpt=T2
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 30.05.2011, 16:43
Treverus's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Work in ZH, live in SZ
Posts: 12,351
Groaned at 363 Times in 293 Posts
Thanked 23,673 Times in 8,567 Posts
Treverus has a reputation beyond reputeTreverus has a reputation beyond reputeTreverus has a reputation beyond reputeTreverus has a reputation beyond reputeTreverus has a reputation beyond reputeTreverus has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

Quote:
View Post
Germany to go nuke free by 2022
Germany's ruling coalition has agreed to shut down all of the nation's nuclear power plants by 2022.
Minister of Ecology Norbert Roettgen of the Christian Democratic Union party made the announcement early Monday after negotiations with coalition partner, the Liberal Party, which had been opposed to setting a date for decommissioning the nuclear facilities.
Opposition parties have long supported shuttering nuclear energy in Germany

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe...ex.html?hpt=T2
Just to put thi into context: The current coalition STOPPED the plan to close down nuclear power in 2009. The old planned was worked out over years with tons of experts developing the alternatives and with huge drama agreed on between the former coalition and the industry. Chancellor Merkel herself decided on the last moment (there were some new laws supposed to come into place in 2010) to simply drop the entire plan and let her friends keep the reactors on the net far longer than previously agreed or planned. (I am BTW not really against nuclear power, but I am very much against ancient reactors that use 1960s technology)

Thanks to Fukushima got the political pressure up again and in order to not lose the various state elections did the coalition need to react: They came up with a great plan: "The elections take place on various weekends in the next three months. How about we agree on a "moratorium" an wait with the final decision for three months"... this was so blatantly obvious that the public was frankly outraged. Not because of nuclear energy, but the attitude of some top level politicians towards the voters. A leaked document of a lobby meeting between the minister of economy and some CEOs of the largest energy companies gave it the rest. The minister openly told them "the whole moratorium is only for the elections, we can cary one when they are over"...

Needless to say that the current coalition had some of the worst results in the history of Germany. One province is for the first time ever now in the hand of the green party (!) and some others went nearly as bad. No German in his right mind trusts the government with this new plan at all. They are trying to save their necks after really pissing off the voters.

In short: I believe it when the last one is switched of in 2022. Not a day earlier.

P.S: Germany is investing heavily in alternative forms of energy, you will see tons of windmills when you drive through the country. It does NOT have to be coal. However, you need more than a windmill to make it happen, from "storage" alternatives to a significantly strengthened power grid (because you will have to move more electricity around from many windmills instead of one plant).

PPS: I believe we could very well live without nuclear power, but nobody wants to. It would mean to live less comfortable. My feeling is that as soon as your next TV isnt getting bigger but smaller to save some energy, the masses will want their power back.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Treverus for this useful post:
  #90  
Old 30.05.2011, 16:55
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,361
Groaned at 338 Times in 274 Posts
Thanked 26,263 Times in 11,000 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

I can understand that the German Greens, having started off as an anti-nuclear movement, are not going to make a U-turn.

I can also see that the present coalition has been trying to stem the tide post Fukushima and that the change of heart was politically rather than ideologically motivated and that a lot of voters saw through that.

What I don't get is the lack of honesty in it all. Windmills are very nice but arithmetically speaking it's not going to add up. Also, they are keeping quiet about the fact that the evil nuclear power operators are actually using their ill gotten money to pay for those windmills and not really explaining who's going to start paying the bills once theose evil guys are deprived of that source of income. I'm also dispappointed that the so called "atom lobby" is keeping such a low profile and not explaining any of that to the public. Meanwhile, there are some major lignite projects going on in Germany, a fact that both the coalition and the Greens are trying to sweep under the carpet. Also, they are seeking to import more natural gas from Russia and are building several new pipelines. The government is excited about some major carbon sequestration projects in Brandenburg but not mentioning that there are some serious doubts over the suitability of this location. In the bigger picture nuclear has proven to be the safest of all power sources over the past 50 years in terms of deaths caused and also the most atmospherically friendly and least polluting. This makes it all the sadder that the so-called Greens can't step beyond their rusty 1970s thinking and actually say that Germany is seriously headed in the wrong direction. They entered politics promising to go against demagogics and populism and to introduce more honesty. Sadly they are now doing the opposite and jumping on the band waggon of public opinion.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #91  
Old 30.05.2011, 17:10
Pancakes's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Zurich-ish
Posts: 5,168
Groaned at 290 Times in 207 Posts
Thanked 10,927 Times in 4,110 Posts
Pancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond reputePancakes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

My biggest concern about an increase in the dependence on nuclear power is that it may slow down and/or prevent the development of safer and renewable energy sources (solar and wind power, etc.).

Sorry if that was mentioned already, but I'm from the US and am rather appalled by the fact that I have NEVER seen a wind farm there... especially because I know what an "energy whore" the US is.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank Pancakes for this useful post:
  #92  
Old 30.05.2011, 17:53
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,361
Groaned at 338 Times in 274 Posts
Thanked 26,263 Times in 11,000 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

Quote:
View Post
My biggest concern about an increase in the dependence on nuclear power is that it may slow down and/or prevent the development of safer and renewable energy sources (solar and wind power, etc.).

Sorry if that was mentioned already, but I'm from the US and am rather appalled by the fact that I have NEVER seen a wind farm there... especially because I know what an "energy whore" the US is.
It depends where you are. The US as a whole is a very important market for the wind sector but being a big country I suppose that doesn't mean much on an area by area basis. I know that California has some very big projects and Texas is also doing a fair bit.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 30.05.2011, 18:27
KeinFranzösisch's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,198
Groaned at 63 Times in 38 Posts
Thanked 2,549 Times in 1,115 Posts
KeinFranzösisch has a reputation beyond reputeKeinFranzösisch has a reputation beyond reputeKeinFranzösisch has a reputation beyond reputeKeinFranzösisch has a reputation beyond reputeKeinFranzösisch has a reputation beyond reputeKeinFranzösisch has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

Nuclear disasters are few and far between when compared to the damages caused by burning fossil fuels. However, when nuclear disasters occur, the damage is wide spread and long lasting.

Clearly fossil fuels are finite and they contribute to CO2 pollution. Those in the industry would have us buy their snake oil that they have "cleaner" fuels, which is environmentally responsible, but it still disregards the tacit fact that fossil resources are FINITE. As the amount of resource available becomes reduced, and as the global population continues to skyrocket, furthering dependency on fossil fuels, then demand goes skyrocketing as well. And the bottom line of this, means higher energy prices.

Therefore it is imperative that alternative sources of energy be found. I'd also suggest that policy makers start looking at ways of effectuating negative population growth -- a necessity that isn't popular, as it means reduced profits, reduced efficiency for welfare systems, and trying to convince or outright restrict people to limit their reproduction rate.

Nuclear isn't the answer. It is clearly unsafe. But the bigger picture needs to be examined as well to reduce energy demand and break our species of dependence on fossil fuels for our productivity and daily existence.
__________________
I would sooner have you hate me for telling you the truth than adore me for telling you lies. - Pietro Aretino
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank KeinFranzösisch for this useful post:
  #94  
Old 30.05.2011, 18:29
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,361
Groaned at 338 Times in 274 Posts
Thanked 26,263 Times in 11,000 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

Quote:
View Post
Therefore it is imperative that alternative sources of energy be found. I'd also suggest that policy makers start looking at ways of effectuating negative population growth -- a necessity that isn't popular, as it means reduced profits, reduced efficiency for welfare systems, etc.
that can also be acheived with reduced safety at nuclear plants, more pollution etc ...
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #95  
Old 30.05.2011, 18:33
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,361
Groaned at 338 Times in 274 Posts
Thanked 26,263 Times in 11,000 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

Quote:
View Post
Nuclear isn't the answer. It is clearly unsafe.
until you look at at the actual statistics.

Even photovoltaics kills more people than nuclear ...

http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/07/sum...s-per-twh.html
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #96  
Old 30.05.2011, 18:49
My2pups's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Used to be Zurich
Posts: 1,706
Groaned at 94 Times in 64 Posts
Thanked 1,989 Times in 870 Posts
My2pups has a reputation beyond reputeMy2pups has a reputation beyond reputeMy2pups has a reputation beyond reputeMy2pups has a reputation beyond reputeMy2pups has a reputation beyond reputeMy2pups has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Is nuclear power a necessity ??

Several wind farms in Northern and Southern California. But they are an eyesore and seem to kill a lot of birds.

Regarding the various greens around the world, I always found it paradoxical that they opposed nuclear. Coal and oil seem to cause so much more pollution, have killed countless people/wildlife during extraction and are creating a cumulative problem with climate change.

Nuclear, while creating extremely toxic waste that we haven't figured out how to dispose of (yet!), in the aggregate, has a reasonable safety record.

Seems that all countries need a more comprehensive set of energy policies. And I think tax breaks should be given to any property owners that want to invest in green tech to heat/cool their homes and buildings more effectively.

Our new home in Spain has a passive cooling system that draws air from underground. We will see how well it works when the temperature is up to 40, but at 30 it seems to work just fine. We also have a cistern in the cellar that collects rainwater for watering of plants in the garden. Unfortunately, they did not incorporate any solar panels, as we get plenty of sun. I am looking into it now.

The cumulative effects, across the globe, of converting older houses and making standard certain practices for newbuilds, would be tremendous...

fduvall

PS - And I do not think investing in nuclear is a zero-sum game for investment in newer technologies. It will be different investors, for sure, but nuclear is a proven technology.


Quote:
View Post
My biggest concern about an increase in the dependence on nuclear power is that it may slow down and/or prevent the development of safer and renewable energy sources (solar and wind power, etc.).

Sorry if that was mentioned already, but I'm from the US and am rather appalled by the fact that I have NEVER seen a wind farm there... especially because I know what an "energy whore" the US is.
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank My2pups for this useful post:
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are Curtains A Necessity? Mrs. Doolittle Housing in general 25 30.07.2011 23:37
Swiss nuclear deterrent Phil_MCR Swiss politics/news 36 27.05.2010 21:52
Google To Go Nuclear flavio International affairs/politics 4 02.04.2010 03:09
The nuclear threat Castro General off-topic 8 11.08.2009 17:21


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 21:53.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0