Are you for or against Nuclear Energy in any shape or form?

Discussion in 'Science' started by Danske, Nov 1, 2011.

?

Are you for or against Nuclear Energy?

  1. For

    332 vote(s)
    91.0%
  2. Against

    33 vote(s)
    9.0%
  1. Foliage

    Foliage Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2002
    Messages:
    32,060
    Location:
    Sleepwithyourdadelaide
    I think he means the pros outweigh the cons.
     
  2. chip

    chip Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2001
    Messages:
    3,682
    Location:
    Pooraka Maccas drivethrough
    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.
     
  3. Cadbury

    Cadbury Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,752
    Location:
    Coogee, WA
    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.
     
  4. IPW

    IPW Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    1,194
    Location:
    Gold Coast
    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.
     
  5. adamsleath

    adamsleath Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2006
    Messages:
    14,410
    Location:
    Sunnybank Q4109
  6. Mathuisella

    Mathuisella Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Messages:
    6,900
    Location:
    in your gearbox...grindin
  7. RobRoySyd

    RobRoySyd Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    8,049
    Location:
    Sydney
    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?"

     
  8. adamsleath

    adamsleath Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2006
    Messages:
    14,410
    Location:
    Sunnybank Q4109
    yeah, but it annoys koss. :p
    ========

    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.
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2019
  9. trevor68

    trevor68 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    4,269
    Location:
    Canberra
    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!
     
  10. Phido

    Phido Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,685
    Location:
    Dark City
    UK hasn't dismantled any of their Nuclear submarines since 1980.
    https://www.itv.com/news/2019-04-03...ure-to-dispose-of-retired-nuclear-submarines/

    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.
     
  11. cvidler

    cvidler Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    12,216
    Location:
    Canberra
    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.
    https://www.wired.com/2007/12/toshibas-home-n/
     
    adamsleath likes this.
  12. adamsleath

    adamsleath Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2006
    Messages:
    14,410
    Location:
    Sunnybank Q4109
    soo cool. 200kW so about 15-20 homes.
    i'll take 10.

    lol

    so long as it doesn't melt down when it stops working :lol:

    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 :lol:
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2019
  13. cvidler

    cvidler Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    12,216
    Location:
    Canberra
    Or just my place in summer with the aircon set to 'snow'.
     
  14. Phido

    Phido Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,685
    Location:
    Dark City
    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.
     
  15. JSmithDTV

    JSmithDTV Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2018
    Messages:
    2,918
    Location:
    Algol, Perseus
    Necro thread... cool.

    Fusions is all I am keen for, not fission.

    JSmith
     
  16. Hive

    Hive Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2010
    Messages:
    5,344
    Location:
    ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
    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?
     
    Last edited: Apr 29, 2019
  17. Tinian

    Tinian Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    17,130
    Location:
    15.0° N, 145.63° E
    If we're using South Australia, I'd feel perfectly good about it.
     
  18. cvidler

    cvidler Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    12,216
    Location:
    Canberra
    don't even bother with the rockets, SA has already been used for nuclear testing.
     
  19. clonex

    clonex Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    20,553
    Location:
    north pole
    im for it but no foreign ownership
     
  20. Eddyah

    Eddyah Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Messages:
    1,627
    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.
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: