Re: Nuclear power vs. coal

bill.cleanpeace@xxxxxxxxx wrote: 
Radioactive fuel rods from two US nuclear power plants are missing. Any
of these fuel rods, a surplus weather balloon and a stick of dynamite
could turn any city into a Chernobyl-like ghost town.

Pure alarmist nonsense. First of all, the rods are "missing" only in that they're not properly accounted for (i.e. records have been lost or misplaced over the years), not in that they've been stolen or are otherwise possibly in the hands of terrorists. Secondly, these fuel rods are far too radioactively "hot" and heavy to be managed by terrorists who have not proven themselves to be very adept at dealing with the 20th century, much less the 21st century. Finally, if you blew up one of these fuel rods with a stick of dynamite somehow, you would end up with, err, pieces of fuel rod dispersed over a small area, easily cleaned up and with no loss of life (though perhaps a few extra cancers over the next 50 years amongst those exposed to the bits).

If you want radioactive wastes which have the potential to be used for a "dirty" bomb, you want to look at *medical* wastes, which are far less protected, easier to move, and far more toxic. The issue with fuel rods is that if you are a nation-state with major resources, you can extract Pu239 from them and making a bomb... otherwise, they are utterly useless from a weapons perspective.

Elenakiddodspeed.com --- for a look at Empty Chernobyl 19 years after
the radiation release.

Note that the creator of this web site got into trouble for misrepresenting the contents of her site, and was forced to make major revisions under penalty of law. Not credible.

Radioactive nuclear power is not economically feasible. Only huge

Utter nonsense. If you didn't speak drivel, you'd get more converts. But drivel is all you Greenies have to offer when it comes to nuclear power. U.S. power companies are about to start construction on several new nuclear power plants now that the Department of Energy has approved three pre-permitted designs (i.e., designs that can be built immediately, with only a site permit) and now that the Bush Administration has provided indemnification against you Greenies tying the thing up in lawsuits. It's only you Greenies and your lawsuits who make nuclear power expensive nowdays. On a per-kilowatt basis, current nuclear power plants are far, far less expensive to maintain and operate than any other kind of power plant in the world.

There are good reasons not to use nuclear power in parts of the world. Nuclear weapons proliferation issues, for example, argue that nuclear power plants should not be built in any nation not already possessing nuclear weapons, since possessing a power plant is virtually the same thing as possssing nuclear weapons. But please quit using the same discredited drivel over and over again in attempts to confuse people.

Take these subsidies and advantages away or equalize them with
subsidies and advantages to undepletable energy from direct solar,
wind, wave, falling water and biomass wastes and a new energy picture
emerges. It includes real competition to OPEC, and nuclear suicide.

Direct solar only works during the daytime and lacks the energy density to provide for the energy needs of typical American homes. Falling water has proven to be an ecological disaster in its own right -- the damming of rivers in the Pacific Northwest in order to provide hydroelectric power has resulted in an ecological disaster for salmon and the native fishes of the area, which evolved to live in free-flowing streams and are murdered by the millions by these dams. Wind is not reliable, and lacks the energy density to maintain the lifestyle we wish to maintain. Biomass is just a piss-poor way of converting solar energy into hydrocarbons. Note that the sun is just a big fusion reactor in the sky, and emits a lot of radioactive particles, many of which actually slam into the earth. Got a suntan? You're suffering radiation poisoning. Hmm. Sounds like you need to go on a vendetta on the sun, which is one of those eeee-vil nuclear reactors (booga booga!).

These taxpayer supported advantages hold down the price of depletable
energy end products and make undepletable energy look comparatively
expensive. Take these advantages away and you will quickly find out
which energy resources are viable and have the best chances of
replacing oil before the peak oil crisis does irreparable damage.

Solar and wind energy have huge subsidies in California. Yet still provide less than 10% of California's energy needs. But keep on with the discredited drivel, it's amusing, in a way...

Reality is that we have only one high-density long-term method to obtain energy, and that is by using the heat of nuclear fission to drive heat cycle engines in order to turn large generators. France derives virtually all of its energy from nuclear power, and if France glows in the dark anytime soon it will only be because of burning cars, not because of exploding power plants...

The alternatives to nuclear power lack the energy density to power a modern lifestyle. You Greenies see that as a virtue, seeing suffering as the correct state for human life. As someone who grew up in a very hot climate prior to the invention of air conditioning, however, I very much prefer air conditioning -- which, once fossil fuels are exhausted, nothing but nuclear power will ever have the energy density to provide for major portions of the world. But I forget, for you Greenies, suffering is a virtue, and comfort is a sin... the only difference between you and the Christofascists who have taken over the United States is the Holy Scripture that you follow, not your overall goal, which is the elimination of all that provides comfort and entertainment to masses of people who should instead be suffering in squalor.

- Elron
.

Relevant Pages

  • UNITE! Info #224en: 1/2 Petition for nukeplant Bb 2
    ... Concerning nuclear energy, one well-known scientist, Linus ... Stop attacking the nuclear power ... cheapest and most environment-friendly technology ... ALL THE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS ARE THREATENED. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • New Power Plants
    ... While the 1979 accident at Pennsylvania’s Three Mile Island nuclear power plant abruptly halted the construction of new reactors in the United States, nuclear power has not been dormant. ... 103 operating nuclear reactors generate approximately 20 percent of the nation’s electricity. ... Much of this pollution comes from fossil-fuel power plants. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: water as fuel
    ... Our energy, water and automobile fuel needs could be met in one ... still have to obtain nuclear fuel for them. ... nuclear power plants generate a metric shitload ...
    (alt.autos.toyota)
  • Lovolution Around the Sun
    ... Lovolution Around the Sun ... A commentary of Harvey Wasserman's Solartopia ... his generation made a big mistake in rejecting the use of nuclear power. ... clean energy without destroying the biosphere. ...
    (alt.gathering.rainbow)
  • Re: America 2042: White Minority, the legacy you have left your kids
    ... fossil fuels to nuclear power - so that we can have plentiful energy, ... Since we don't yet have fusion power, nuclear power - with the Thorium ... Many cultures and languages, with speakers of all languages being as ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
Loading