Discussion in 'Science' started by Danske, Nov 1, 2011.
I think he means the pros outweigh the cons.
That's what I was hoping, but making an absolute claim that there's 'nothing bad' doesn't leave much room for doubt.
I'm more inclined to the idea that technology itself doesn't have a simplistic good/bad morality, as it's people who decide how to use it.
My gut feeling is that it will become a reality. However the technology really needs a revolutionary breakthrough. If the current fusion method simply evolved to the point of being viable, we'd have these huge installations many times the size and cost of a comparable fission plant.
Didn't read the whole thread, but If we're allowed to build a fancy flash new one close to my place I'll go work at it, would be the coolest job ever!
Oh and clearly I'm for it, surely there's somewhere near here we could have one? Here being the Gold Coast, I'm mainly asking for close because I don't want to have to travel too far to go to work.
Climate change information.
another Nuclear thread. awesome.
check out the poll.
The nuclear thing comes up in the renewables thread from time to time,
From 7 years ago.
Somewhat on topic one of the last countries I'd have thought had a serious nuclear problem was the UK. Not an accident, just a lack of hard questions being asked like "then what happens to it?"
yeah, but it annoys koss.
a geological disposal facility. (how about in disused mines? there's enough of them in the uk from their coal mining hay days )
back underground from whence it came.
Pffft, wait for a decent load and fire the waste into space, serves 2 purposes too. 1: clean planet 2: if their is alien life they will do doubt drop by to tell us to pick up our litter!
UK hasn't dismantled any of their Nuclear submarines since 1980.
Even more worrying they haven't been de-fuelled since 2004. So these are just rusting hulks sitting in the water waiting to sink.
UK really doesn't have a storage solution either as all its disposal sites aren't up to scratch.
So you really need a whole end to end solution with nuclear. IMO it is still better than coal, because coal you just release into the atmosphere, nuclear they force you to deal with the waste.
Nuclear isn't renewable energy, so shouldn't really be in the renewable energy thread. It is carbon free or low carbon. Nuclear struggles in price against coal in regular market.
Nuclear would suddenly look very cheap if coal was put under the same regulatory load (safety, dealing with waste products etc.).
I'd have one of these if I could.
soo cool. 200kW so about 15-20 homes.
i'll take 10.
so long as it doesn't melt down when it stops working
mass production might reduce cost per unit....
The installation company would have to be responsible for disposal costs, and regulation/certification/safety standards, applied to the cost of sale. I'd trust an advanced economy to do that. Put Frydenberg and scott dumbarse morrison in charge of it
Or just my place in summer with the aircon set to 'snow'.
This is true. Nuclear everything has to be accounted for, Coal, you just literally dump it straight into the environment. Carbon capture coal is a complete failure and gets to costs of nuclear.
I can see nuclear working with say a massive aluminium smelters, which runs on nuclear 24/7, but during the day can up its rate of production to take advantage of renewables. Typically they are built with other energy intensive industries, High Speed Rail, petrolchemical, manufacturing etc. We don't have any or much of that stuff. With nuclear you also need long term planning. We struggle with that as well.
Necro thread... cool.
Fusions is all I am keen for, not fission.
Quite expensive to strap enough rocket fuel to reach escape velocity, no way in hell would you want that in orbit anywhere near earth.
If there are mistakes during launch - how do you feel about depleted nuclear fuel raining down?
If we're using South Australia, I'd feel perfectly good about it.
don't even bother with the rockets, SA has already been used for nuclear testing.
im for it but no foreign ownership
I'm also for it. Indifferent about the 'ownership' of it as the above poster is. I've been for nuclear since I was a high school student studying physics.
It's quite a divisive topic. Quite like gay marriage, I wish we could track who are for and against it overtime to see who flip to the cool side once the status quo says it's cool to.