NUCLEAR FUELING
Posted: 08 April 2007 09:52 PM   [ Ignore ]
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  11
Joined  2007-04-07

I seem to find that nobody seems to be considering nuclear energy-both the vast advantages it would bring if managed properly or the huge disadvantages it brings when mismanaged as seems to have happened so far

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 April 2007 10:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  108
Joined  2007-04-05

Thank you for bringing it up.

Yes, this is a subject that has been discussed in great length amongst my family. My personal feeling is that nuclear is a wonderful energy source, and really could answer all of our problems, however; man is too stupid to use it.

I don’t think we will be able to safely do this at any time in the next few decades. History has shown what a mess we can make, and until technology is ready to take man’s place in managing this difficult tool, we are likely to repeat that.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 April 2007 11:59 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  22
Joined  2007-04-04

Amen to that.
I suppose it would take some very dedicated and some very educated people to be able to run a plant, not just any average joe. Perhaps if they had a plant somewhat in the middle of nowhere (where the workers could live nearby in company owned property) it could be a little safer for the general public…but that’s just a suggestion.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 April 2007 05:39 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  205
Joined  2007-08-27

Well simply put - Its dangerous and you risk the lives and homes of millions of people if something goes wrong. Also the byproducts are radioactive materials which have half-lives of hundreds of years, so they remain dangerous for supper long periods of time.

About the dangers, have you ever heard of the Chernobyl disaster?
In a nutshell, the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plan exploded one day in 1986 and caused about 60 immediate deaths, over 9,000 deaths from cancer from the 6.6 million people who were exposed to this radiation. About 336,000 people had to evacuate and relocate due to the radioactive state of the site which by the way is still un-livable.

So… Is it worth taking the chance, especially with the rise in terrorism? Or is it better to just build greener and live greener while getting free energy from the sun, wind and water without splitting molecules?

 Signature 

Energy conservation is the foundation of energy independence.
Thomas H. Allen

Check out Our Conservation Products and Save!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2007 02:10 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  22
Joined  2007-04-04

It kind of makes you wonder if there is ever anything out there that is as good as nuclear energy but without the high risks. Perhaps it’s just a wake up call for us to just stop being lazy and conserve what we got ;P

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 April 2007 12:13 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  8
Joined  2007-04-14

I read about the Chernobyl a while back. Even though nuclear energy could be helpful there is so many problems that could arise. I am not even sure how we would be able to keep the plants safe. In my opinion the risks far outweigh any possible benefits.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 April 2007 02:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  20
Joined  2007-04-04

At the rate we consume energy now, I wonder how long it would take before we had massive amounts of nuclear waste that we would have to try to contain safely.  Such repositories undoubtedly become targets, too.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 April 2007 09:40 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  46
Joined  2007-03-06

Though not everyone will agree with me, I too feel that nuclear fuel will play an important role, especially in the near future as fossil fuel resources deplete.

As much as I would like the world to rely totally on renewable energy sources, I simply don’t feel it is a realistic goal - Not within the next 50 years anyway. I believe we will need nuclear reactors for some time to come and would be best off working towards generating more and more energy from renewable sources. As we shift our dependance, perhaps we could move away from nuclear sources, though I don’t see any other alternatives at present that produce the amount of energy we are currently using.

Chernobyl was a huge disaster, though things have improved significantly since then. Waste disposal is a problem though the amount generated per unit energy produced is relatively small. Plants and nuclear materials will inevitably be targets for terrorists, but at the end of the day, they probably are already.

I would like to see a world without even the smallest risk as posed by nuclear power, but unfortunately I just don’t think it can be done at present.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 April 2007 02:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  22
Joined  2007-04-04

I suppose the other problem besides disasters on the downside is the long term rather than short term, what I mean is that it may be ok for us but not future generations, we would have made a problem they’d have to deal with, for example, we might destroy the environment with radiation around the plants with waste and they’d be left with nothing.
I don’t know much about nuclear energy other than the dangers, and I want to say I’m for it, but it’s just the long term effects that worry me a bit.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 May 2011 11:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  7
Joined  2011-05-23

it is depend to generations .I mean is that it may be ok for us but not future generations,

 Signature 

lnvention marketing 
wholesale goods

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
     How Extreme is Too Extreme? ››
take action
  • Subscribe to our weekly CO2 reduction tips; Learn alot, Help alot & Save alot too!
  • Name:
  • Email: