I know about fission and radioactive decay: i know about the science, AND I know about the technology BUT I also know about politics and business, and it's those 2 latter things that worry me. So: Nuclear power NO THANX. Give me solar panels on my roof, tidal power stations and a coast line lined with wind turbines.
In any case, I would like to see at least the same amount of money is being spent on windpower as on nuclear energy for the forseeable future, and it not being actively being sabotaged like in my country (Belgium).
... So the message here is "let's cut some corners to make more money" in stead of "let's make nuclear power safe" That's the nail in nuclear power(s coffin.
Do remember an earthquake of this magnitude is a 1 in 1000+ year event. It's not realistic to plan for those when the life of your reactor is 50 years...
so with 1000 reactors across the globe(442-6 in operation, 65 in construction), you can have one of these every year ?
by heavy use of HVDC to shift power from windy areas to non-windy areas.
there is ALWAYS wind. no wind is a physical impossibility. (unless you take out the sun and the moon and the rotation of the earth out of the equation)
ALL sources of energy receive subsidy. some examples : Oil (how much did all those wars cost?), coal(damage to public health=hidden subsidy), nuclear(research since the forties)
seeing that for 3000 deaths the us starts a war killing tens of thousands middle-easteners and thousands of its own soldiers, I ask myself where the reaction is to the yearly thousands of deaths on the road.
Slashdot Mirror
TEPCO is more concerned with profits than irradiated citizens.
Capitalism FTW !
Radioactive fishes. radioactivity will accumulate in the top of the food-chain.
I know about fission and radioactive decay: i know about the science, AND I know about the technology BUT I also know about politics and business, and it's those 2 latter things that worry me. So: Nuclear power NO THANX. Give me solar panels on my roof, tidal power stations and a coast line lined with wind turbines.
I suggest you go live in Fukushima.
so I had a bad source of information. I can still quote another report saying that 'Chernobyl disaster still hurting millions'
http://www.un.org/ha/chernobyl/docs/dev2373.htm
In any case, I would like to see at least the same amount of money is being spent on windpower as on nuclear energy for the forseeable future, and it not being actively being sabotaged like in my country (Belgium).
Sorry, It's in dutch
http://www.deredactie.be/permalink/1.984013
especially time-index 10:00 - 10:30 is interesting.
... So the message here is "let's cut some corners to make more money" in stead of "let's make nuclear power safe" That's the nail in nuclear power(s coffin.
Chernobyl, an area where over 90% of children born have serious birth defects.
are you saying there is nothing wrong with nuclear power ? are you saying absolute safety is even physically possible ?
thanks for the numbers.
t might not make sense to plan for 1000 year events
we DO when the radioactive crap will be here for thousands of years.
Do remember an earthquake of this magnitude is a 1 in 1000+ year event. It's not realistic to plan for those when the life of your reactor is 50 years...
so with 1000 reactors across the globe(442-6 in operation, 65 in construction), you can have one of these every year ?
Cutting corners to up profit
THAT is bean-counter territory. every color and nationality has them; and the engineers take shit.
maybe you should check out a wind map. sure, wind in 1 spot is not constant. but over large areas, it IS constant.
Solar and wind aren't useful to replace base load
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermittent_power_source#European_super_grid
by heavy use of HVDC to shift power from windy areas to non-windy areas.
there is ALWAYS wind. no wind is a physical impossibility. (unless you take out the sun and the moon and the rotation of the earth out of the equation)
Wind power is unreliable
source ?
solar power do not have enougth scale
source ?
BS
read : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermittent_power_source#European_super_grid
and by heavy use of HVDC to shift power from windy areas to non-windy areas
I suggest you look at a wind map and search for the largest area with zero wind.
hey look: areas without wind have wind circling around them !
what I am basically saying is : there is ALWAYS wind, you only need some power cables to transport the electricity.
correction : $3000 per American
a little ? how 'bout $1000000000000 or about $300000 per American since 2001.
they mean 1$ per maximum possible output wattage. (so a 1000000$ for a 1MW peak power plant)
without the “need for government subsidization.”
ALL sources of energy receive subsidy. some examples : Oil (how much did all those wars cost?), coal(damage to public health=hidden subsidy), nuclear(research since the forties)
though it declines to give any actual figures
This smells funny. a generous windows-salesman ? a receptive IT-manager ?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/feb/04/radical-islam-united-states-independence
It's not radical Islam that worries the US – it's independence
250 * (14.5 billion)*4/3*pi lightyears is as good as infinite as far as I'm concerned. hell, even (1Million)*4/3*pi Ly is big enough for me.
a bunch of people dead every year
seeing that for 3000 deaths the us starts a war killing tens of thousands middle-easteners and thousands of its own soldiers, I ask myself where the reaction is to the yearly thousands of deaths on the road.