The Three Gorges Dam is fully operational, and the power it generates is equivalent to that given by 15 nuclear reactors.

Well done China!

Yeah, but how many people were displaced to create the lake and dam in the first place, how much wildlife and eco-system has been destroyed for it.

Exactly. Hydro power is far from being a magic solution, taking huge areas under reservoirs and often changing the landscape quite drastically (combining many rivers into one etc.). According to wikipedia 1.24 million people were relocated for the three gorges plant.

On the other hand, nuclear power is also not as bad as a lot of people think (imo). It emits practically no green house gases and with the reasonable high demands for security, is very safe. From electricity point of view, nuclear power is quite nice, since you can often build it quite close to areas of consumption.

Go nuclear!

(partly joking, nuclear is no dream come true either)

It's relatively easy to complete huge engineering projects when you don't care about (a) people or (b) the environment.

About "It emits practically no green house gases "
True but quite a lot is generated by the building process & materials required.

The building of the Three Gorges dam also caused quite a lot greenhouse gas. In fact any big construction project does.

Like anyone can build power plants without generating any waste? If not, what's your point?

Don't forget, this is China----They are also planning almost 400 new Coal Burning plants. Kinda makes any new Hydro/Wind/Solar attempts environmentally irrelevant.

My point is that you have to look at the whole thing & its total impact on the environment, not just the end result.

Eco-systems recover and adapt.

Joke or not, what a load of tripe. Tell me, what do you do with the radioactive waste once it is used up?

I'm not specifically anti-nuclear, but the only real "cost" here is that of the people who were displaced.

Once that is settled (no pun intended), the rest is a win/win.

Yeah, nothing else. And as Treverus says above, it's really great even though there's a small hiccup of people not being compensated.

So, another successful large scale project of taking money from the population (in lost land, farming income, property) and putting it in the hands of the already rich (costruction firm owners, public company owners, local and central government officials).

it really wouldn't have cost much to have a proper consultation/compenstion package, but with everyone telling the Chinese government what a fanatstic job they're doing, why should they bother.

I know, Adrian, it isn't great.

But I would rather an motherEFing big HEP plant, rather than 15 nuclear powerstations run by a State who like to be economical with the truth, or for that matter x number of coal-powered plants belching out enough power to feed China's evergrowing energy demands.

reprocess it or store it for several thousand years. no biggie.

the alternative is to grind it up into tiny particles and then release it into the atmosphere. "what are you crazy" you say? that's exactly what we do with coal power...

http://answers.google.com/answers/th...id/780347.html

Officially 1,24 and by other estimates up to 1.5 mio people had to be relocated. Archeological treasures had to be evacuated, just as in case of Lake Nasser south of Aswan. In case of Lake Nasser, wildlife not only recovered but that sizeable lake is now home to fish of sorts not present before. The eco-system may even be improved. But you only will see the longterm effects after a few decades.

How many people and animals were affected when Fukushima blew up? That were only two reactors, this dam has the power of 15 reactors.

P.S: The locals never complained that the got relocated - the problem was that the promised compensation payments apparently not really arrived where they should.

And the power to kill quite a lot of people and animals when it blows up.

Swiss companies worked on this as well

I guess that China is not too worried that this "super-power generating" dam is built on a geologically unstable region. What would happen downstream from these dams should an earthquake collapse a dam wall?

But then again, I am sure they are fully aware of it... perhaps it is a form of population control.

Nuclear power is the only realistic way, currently, to meet future power demands. Fast breeder reactors convert readily available U-238 or Thorium-232 to fissionable Uranium - producing more than they consume of U-235. Thorium reactors may be the way forward. Of course, the holy grail is fusion. But that's been twenty years away for a long time...

The amount of waste is really very very small - but there's an irrational fear of radioactivity, coupled with a very rational distrust of politicians. Looking at it objectively, nuclear power is the cleanest source of energy we have - certainly very low in carbon emissions. Greenies should, in fact, be in favour of it, but there's been too much politics and investment in being anti-nuclear because of nuclear weapons for that to happen anytime soon.

__________________
Down with racism. Long live miscegenation!

I am sorry gentlemen, I could not agree more with your comments on the nuclear power. I understand your comments on the gas emissions but what about the nuclear waste which takes around 100000 years to neutralize it.

I don't really see what is so "clean" about taking an element from nature, enriching it, making it 85% more radioactive and then dumping it back to the earth.

Yes, the need for electricity growing so fast. But maybe this is the part of the equation we should think about. What are the ways to increase the efficiency of our products, transmission lines, etc. How many of us really taking care of this.

The renewable power generation systems are not so efficient and productive today. However, rather then spending our R&D budgets on developing new generations of nuclear power plants, we can spend this budget on improving the solar cells, wind turbines, nano technologies,smart grid options, etc.