What, exactly, is the argument against nuclear power?

[maluckey]

Moonie,

I am a strong advocate of CYA, and solar is great for those places where nothing else is available. Hell, I even used geothermal once in a remote location. Thie issue against solar is that currently, you can't even 100 percent power a typical household with every square inch of the roof covered in solar panels. You might do it if you have an acre to spare and you conserved every kW in a miserly fassion. In the city where will you find the space for this?

In the country there is plenty of space you will say.....but where will we grow the crops? 500 acres given to a fusion plant will provide power for 300,000 people and the industries that go along with them. By the time solar can match a quarter of the output of a small fusion plant and be in a reasonable footprint, fusion tech will be in place and operational.

Solar power as the main source of power will not be viable in the near future (50 or so years). What it will do is continue to grow and advance, thus free the average Joe (somewhat) from the dependence of batteries or a plug to run some items, and continue to reduce reliance on fossil fuels.

Price per KW is still outrageous with solar with a 8.84 Peak kW Solar Array costing $29,118.81 after California rebates. This array will still not power the home if you run the washing machine and dryer regularly. The battery array will die quickly with those kind of loads. This array would take many many years to pay for itself.

 

[Moonbeam]

ma: I am a strong advocate of CYA, and solar is great for those places where nothing else is available. Hell, I even used geothermal once in a remote location. Thie issue against solar is that currently, you can't even 100 percent power a typical household with every square inch of the roof covered in solar panels. You might do it if you have an acre to spare and you conserved every kW in a miserly fassion. In the city where will you find the space for this?

Mo: Roofs, building sides, translucent solar windows.....you don't need 100% at home. The sun shines when electrical needs are greatest so solar reduces the need for new plant. You generate daytime what you can and run your meter backward and draw from the grid at other times. Solar farms at a distance can supplement or supply what can't be generated in the city.

ma: In the country there is plenty of space you will say.....but where will we grow the crops? 500 acres given to a fusion plant will provide power for 300,000 people and the industries that go along with them. By the time solar can match a quarter of the output of a small fusion plant and be in a reasonable footprint, fusion tech will be in place and operational.

Mo: The world needs 1% of its crop land devoted to solar to supply its total needs. But it doesn't have to be crop land just an equivalent area. The SW deserts would be the place to start. Such efforts have already begun economically and without government funds. Lets fund solar for a huge grow via scales of efficiency. It's far more poison free and pays for itself relatively easily.

ma: Solar power as the main source of power will not be viable in the near future (50 or so years). What it will do is continue to grow and advance, thus free the average Joe (somewhat) from the dependence of batteries or a plug to run some items, and continue to reduce reliance on fossil fuels.

Mo: If God meant us to fly he's have given us wings. Imagine a solar air force.

ma: Price per KW is still outrageous with solar with a 8.84 Peak kW Solar Array costing $29,118.81 after California rebates. This array will still not power the home if you run the washing machine and dryer regularly. The battery array will die quickly with those kind of loads. This array would take many many years to pay for itself.

Mo: Here is a calculation I ran for my place for 50% of my monthly use.

Solar Rating: Great
(5.359 kWh/sq-m/day)
Solar System Capacity Required: 2.00 kW of peak power
Roof Area Needed: 200 sq-ft
This is only an estimate based upon many assumptions. Installation costs can vary considerably. We encourage you to work with a Solar Pro who can provide you with a more detailed cost estimate. We estimate that a 2.00 kW peak power system will cost between $14,400 and $21,600. This estimate assumes the mid-point of this cost range.
Assumed Installation cost:
(before rebates, incentives or tax credits)
See the Cost Notes, below! $ 18,000
Expected Pacific Gas and Electric Co Utility Rebate:
(Limited to not exceed state max. incentive amount) ($ 0 )
Expected CA State Rebate
($2.8/watt installed)
(Maximum: $84000) ($ 4,536 )
CA State Tax Credit ($ 0 )
Federal Tax Credit:
(Installation type: Residential ) ($ 2,000 )
Income Tax on Tax Credit: $ 0
YOUR ESTIMATED NET COST: $ 11,464
Monthly Payment (5% apr, 30 years): $ 62
SAVINGS & BENEFITS
Increase in Property Value: $6,580 to $11,612
Exempt from Property Tax: YES
Accelerated (5 yr) Depreciation:
(Installation type: Residential ) No
First-year Utility Savings:
Since this is not a business application, these savings are in after tax dollars. So, your realized savings may actually be higher! $329 to $581
Average Monthly Utility Savings:
(over 25-year expected life of system) $46 to $81 Assumed Utility
(over 25-year expected life of system) $552 to $975
25-year Utility Savings: $13,805 to $24,364
Return on Investment (ROI):
(with Solar System cost set as asset value) 201%
Return on Investment (ROI):
(with Property appreciation set as asset value) 350% to 350%
Years to Break even:
(Includes property value appreciation) < 1 to 5 years
Years to Break even:
(Assuming no property value appreciation) to 12 years
Greenhouse Gas (CO2) Saved:
over 25-year system life 58.0 tons
(116,000 auto miles)


Interestingly what it costs a month for 30 years per month is about my monthly electric bill.

 

[Moonbeam]

 

[DrPizza]

Odd thing that no one ever seems to think about in terms of solar power:

The sun isn't going to produce any more energy, just because we have solar cells covering a sizeable hunk of our planet...
Conservation of energy...

So, by sapping all that energy off, what are going to be the global climate implications.
Furthermore, greaaaaat, in 50 years, solar will be advanced enough to cover *today's* energy needs... The population of earth doubles how often? How many countries are finally entering the industrial age?

Fusion.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Odd thing that no one ever seems to think about in terms of solar power:

The sun isn't going to produce any more energy, just because we have solar cells covering a sizeable hunk of our planet...
Conservation of energy...

So, by sapping all that energy off, what are going to be the global climate implications.
Furthermore, greaaaaat, in 50 years, solar will be advanced enough to cover *today's* energy needs... The population of earth doubles how often? How many countries are finally entering the industrial age?

Fusion.

Oh boy, I can't imagine why nobody thought of that. Yup, I guess solar is out. If we collect the energy from the sun the earth will just get hotter.

I have an idea. Until we can create our own suns right here on earth and launch giant sunglasses in space, we can unlock the frozen gravitational energy of ancient suns that created heavy radioactive metals and release that heat all over the place. Then we will not only have all that extra heat, but we'll have all the deadly toxins too. I like it. I've changed my mind and fission's the ticket, but only of course, till we can create another sun right here on earth. It will give us time to work on our sun glasses two.

I love the logical thinking that comes from the nuclear camp.

 

[piasabird]

If you think Nuclear Energy is so safe, I suggest you take a good look at this website:

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/

This is a tour of what Nuclear Energy can do!

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Wow, I usually stay far away from P&N... But, this thread wasn't that bad of a read.

However, I'd like to point out just a couple of things:
1. The OP is wrong on the first line:

we all know it is the most power-per-weight ratio of any material, by far.

Nope. Not true. First, I suppose he means energy. Regardless, hydrogen, yes folks, hydrogen is the answer. Fusion.

Well, actually Manganese (Mn) would probably provide the most power per unit mass, since it's the heaviest element that can still undergo fusion.

Everything else, I totally agree with you on. But you already knew that.

Well, unless you get 55 times more energy from an atom of Manganese than you do from an atom of hydrogen when it undergoes Fusion (or 27 or... depending on the isotopes involved...) Then Hydrogen still wins

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: DrPizza

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: DrPizza
Wow, I usually stay far away from P&N... But, this thread wasn't that bad of a read.

However, I'd like to point out just a couple of things:
1. The OP is wrong on the first line:

we all know it is the most power-per-weight ratio of any material, by far.

Nope. Not true. First, I suppose he means energy. Regardless, hydrogen, yes folks, hydrogen is the answer. Fusion.

Well, actually Manganese (Mn) would probably provide the most power per unit mass, since it's the heaviest element that can still undergo fusion.

Everything else, I totally agree with you on. But you already knew that.

Well, unless you get 55 times more energy from an atom of Manganese than you do from an atom of hydrogen when it undergoes Fusion (or 27 or... depending on the isotopes involved...) Then Hydrogen still wins

Eh, you're probably right. I am too lazy to look up the atomic mass differential.

 

[Moonbeam]

More good news.

 

[UptheMiddle]

Risk can be controlled - Did you know that the US Navy operates the largest number of Nuclear Reactors for any single entity? Their history of catastrophic failures is non-existant because of 2 simple reasons:
1) Great design
2) Highly trained operators

Also consider the environment in which their reactors are operating under and you'd quickly see that safety can be controlled. The first step is to standardize the civilian design to ensure safety and reduce costs.

 

[BarneyFife]

Originally posted by: piasabird
If you think Nuclear Energy is so safe, I suggest you take a good look at this website:

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/

This is a tour of what Nuclear Energy can do!

This is exactly what I was going to post. All the "Pro-Nuke" people should take a look at those pictures.

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: alchemize
France has a buttload of nuke power plants - they seem to be getting along OK.

Well...

If you like it so much why don't you move there then you commie.

:laugh:

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: piasabird
If you think Nuclear Energy is so safe, I suggest you take a good look at this website:

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/

This is a tour of what Nuclear Energy can do!

This is exactly what I was going to post. All the "Pro-Nuke" people should take a look at those pictures.

Yeah, its exactly what happens when you don't design or operate your nuclear power plant safely.

I could find pictures of surgeries gone horribly wrong and deadly car accidents. Does that mean that all surgeries are going to go horribly wrong or that every car trip will end in death? No.

Nuclear power has a very good track record when things are done right.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Originally posted by: BarneyFife

Originally posted by: piasabird
If you think Nuclear Energy is so safe, I suggest you take a good look at this website:

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/

This is a tour of what Nuclear Energy can do!

This is exactly what I was going to post. All the "Pro-Nuke" people should take a look at those pictures.

Yeah, its exactly what happens when you don't design or operate your nuclear power plant safely.

I could find pictures of surgeries gone horribly wrong and deadly car accidents. Does that mean that all surgeries are going to go horribly wrong or that every car trip will end in death? No.

Nuclear power has a very good track record when things are done right.

Yup, Nuclear is as safe as hunting with the Vice President.

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: EatSpam
I could find pictures of surgeries gone horribly wrong and deadly car accidents. Does that mean that all surgeries are going to go horribly wrong or that every car trip will end in death?

No, but according to the loonies here, this makes surgery and driving too dangerous to be performed.

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: EatSpam
I could find pictures of surgeries gone horribly wrong and deadly car accidents. Does that mean that all surgeries are going to go horribly wrong or that every car trip will end in death?

No, but according to the loonies here, this makes surgery and driving too dangerous to be performed.

There are a lot of loonies here alright, buying multi-billion dollar contract driven corporate propaganda "But but they say it's totally safe!" wanting more ticking nukes in populated areas.

If you think think greed driven people have your best interests in mind then I have a bridge to sell you.

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: EatSpam
I could find pictures of surgeries gone horribly wrong and deadly car accidents. Does that mean that all surgeries are going to go horribly wrong or that every car trip will end in death?

No, but according to the loonies here, this makes surgery and driving too dangerous to be performed.

There are a lot of loonies here alright, buying multi-billion dollar contract driven corporate propaganda "But but they say it's totally safe!" wanting more ticking nukes in populated areas.

If you think think greed driven people have your best interests in mind then I have a bridge to sell you.

They also make your cars, gas ovens, electrical generators, airplanes, ships, etc... but I guess nobody who makes any profits should be trusted. In that case, I suggest you strip off all your clothes, and join the state of nature somewhere in the middle of the Congo. The evil capitalists won't get you there.

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
wanting more ticking nukes in populated areas.

Yeah, I think my ignorance fuse has just gone off.

/thread for me

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: Steeplerot
wanting more ticking nukes in populated areas.

Yeah, I think my ignorance fuse has just gone off.

/thread for me

Trust me, my fuse is already blown ages ago with your and others naievity.

Big company says everything is safe! I guess it is then, look at the flashy words they use! duuuh they have my best intrests at heart, everything is OK la la la *drools on self*


Your arguement smacks of ignorance and partisan blindness, not mine, I error on the side of caution.

"If YOU don't trust the same greedmongers you must be a whacko duuuur."

It is 2006, and there are real options to be developed, nuke power is in noones best interest but the big companys that feed you this BS.

And you buy it hook line and sinker, so badly mind you, you think you can be condesending to someone actually using their head in the name of safety, get a grip.

Your a tool, Here's some advice, next time you fall for such bs make sure you get a cut of the profit being made off your stupidity. Your letting our future get fvcked and not even asking for a reacharound. go you.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Paratus

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I particularly like the small garage unit that drives your car 11,000 mile a year.

Why pay the nuclear plant for power it produces when you can produce and sell your own. There are plenty of ethical scientists who aren't Doctor Death.

Solar is fine for distributed power but it will not in the near term replace centralized power stations.

Global damage from FFs are much worse than localized damage from nuclear waste.

Meaningless mumbo jumbo. Solar has the capacity to be not only distributed but large scaled farmed as well. Nuclear is also not a near term option. There is nothing that can't be done solar in the same time as nuclear with a will to do it. I have already posted on the huge subsidies nuclear has gotten that solar has not. We will be much more terrorism immune with solar both local and regional and we won't have to worry about nuclear accident or storing poisons that kill for thousands of years.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: EatSpam
I could find pictures of surgeries gone horribly wrong and deadly car accidents. Does that mean that all surgeries are going to go horribly wrong or that every car trip will end in death?

No, but according to the loonies here, this makes surgery and driving too dangerous to be performed.

I think it would be you, here, who is the loon if you imagine this is an intelligent argument or counterpoint to arguments made so far. The issue is not about not taking risk, there is risk in everything. It is about not taking risks with poisons we already have made tons of and have not yet properly stored. It is about the obvious fact that humans are like pigs. They love to make a mess but don't want to clean up. That's not fun and it takes money. It is about not allowing people who are too opaque not to see how they are screw up the world further for our children. You got your nuclear long ago and have made a mess and will not fix it. And now the loons want to do more of the same always dreaming that a solution is just over the hill. It is so typical of the narrowly educated to be smart in some small area and generally human stupid. The nuclear folk have such good intentions and such pathetic follow through. How bout we start with the nuclear waste barrels that are leaking.

Check out the titles of the links here.

 

[JoeBaD]

Christ,

I haven't visited these boards in ages yet I find that moonbeam remains the moronic outspoken jerk he always was. Good to see things haven't changed.

The same liberals who don't want nukes, don't want drilling in ANWAR, don't want drilling off the coast of FL, don't want drilling off the coast of CA, don't want windmills off the coast of MA (obscurring Cronkite's view), will hold Senate hearings to determine why oil prices are so high. LOL!

We can't even apply non-military pressure on Iran because everyone is afraid they'll turn off their oil.

The rest of the world is building safe nuke facilities. But not the US. Too damn many environmental nutjobs in the US.

 

[UptheMiddle]

Apparently, Moonbeam is blessed with a very broad education (as the majority of people are "narrowly educated to be smart in some small area and generally human stupid"). What your superior intellect (laughable) fails to realize is that your elitist attitude erodes your credibility. And its probably likely that your education is limited to that of text, with little to no practical knowledge/experience beyond that of classroom walls.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: UptheMiddle
Apparently, Moonbeam is blessed with a very broad education (as the majority of people are "narrowly educated to be smart in some small area and generally human stupid"). What your superior intellect (laughable) fails to realize is that your elitist attitude erodes your credibility. And its probably likely that your education is limited to that of text, with little to no practical knowledge/experience beyond that of classroom walls.

Clearly you lave little knowledge or practical experience.

1. It is not superior knowledge, as you fancifully imagine, that makes people smart in the human department, it is knowledge about oneself that opens the door to knowledge about others. God knows where you got such a notion, perhaps a text book.

2. Credibility is something that a persons has with someone else who is credible. It will not worry me greatly that I have none with you, therefore, since you have none yourself.

3. Having no credibility is doubtless why you don't seem to know just how worthless credibility really is. Those who have credibility with us 'elitists' is vanishingly small. In the land of the blind, the one eyed man may be king but he has, in turn, no visible credibility and none of the blind see his crown.

4. Clearly ones capacity to perceive knowledge and understanding depends on ones possession of those very qualities. You can't see what you don't have.

5. My point was that while the egg heads can build a nuclear reactor they fail to realize that the mess we've made from our past reactors has not been cleaned up. A fool thinks that what is will tomorrow be different. All you had to do, instead of attacking me was to address my argument. That you failed to take on what was clearly laid out tells me that you felt threatened by the realization that you too are just another pin head who refuses to address the obvious, or obvious at least to a genius like me. Yup, I read a book and it said, "You know we haven't cleaned up our past nuclear mess. Why would it be prudent to make even more?". It's just amazing the sh!t you can find in books.

 

[JoeBaD]

Then again, moonbeam may just be a self-indulged jerk.