Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Denis
Shogun
Joined: 31-Dec-2006
Location: Ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 207
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Undeclared final war Posted: 20-Feb-2007 at 10:53 |
Well the only reason that these 'sun-states' aren't developing the CSP infrastructure as we speak is because they are short sighted; the fossil fuel industry is making them far too much money at the moment. Wait a few more years down the line when oil production will peak (i think i read somewhere that that is to be in 2008) and we should see a lot more enthusiasm for solar coming from these countries. Western democracies have a responsability to invest in these technologies now, or at least acknowledge their worth. Its no secret that many western countries, particularly Britain, seem to have an agenda to build more nuclear plants no matter what.
|
"Death belongs to God alone. By what right do men touch that unknown thing"
Victor Hugo
|
|
Dolphin
Arch Duke
Suspended
Joined: 06-Feb-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1551
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Feb-2007 at 11:03 |
That's one year denis, duh!
There is no secret conspiracy to make loads of nuclear plants in Britain in order to destroy the planet, they just acknowledge the benefits of nuclear power, especially in such a highly populated island. There has been prudent risk assesment carried out and the benefits simply outweighed the dangers.
|
|
Denis
Shogun
Joined: 31-Dec-2006
Location: Ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 207
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Feb-2007 at 11:10 |
So you don't believe that if every country across the world started building nuclear plants en masse that the risks of a disaster wouldn't increase, even if the chances of a meltdown are ridiculously low (Lets just say for arguments sake, 0.03% or something like that) Take into account that at present nations such as North Korea have nuclear power stations. And its a bit of a no brainer that when Kim Jon Il dies something seriously mad will happen over there. Who is going to take control of the electricity supply without a central administration for example? The variables and risks associated with nuclear power are too great. FFS, nuclear plants have been built on fault lines, showing the stupidity of some of the designers. I simply don't trust some of these people to build plants which have the ability to decide the fate of certain parts of this planet. (And you must accept that if god forbid anything happens in Sellafield, Ireland is f**ked)
|
"Death belongs to God alone. By what right do men touch that unknown thing"
Victor Hugo
|
|
Dolphin
Arch Duke
Suspended
Joined: 06-Feb-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1551
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Feb-2007 at 11:54 |
The example you gave was Britain, and I responded to that. Ireland is in big trouble if Sellafield blows, IF it blows, which would not mean meltdown, it would have to mean an explosion from within about the size of a nuke. Yes, of course the risk increases. But the question is here, do we change our behaviour or do we create ways to facilitate it? If it is the former, then nuclear plants are not necessary, if the latter they most likely and unfortunately are.
|
|
Denis
Shogun
Joined: 31-Dec-2006
Location: Ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 207
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Feb-2007 at 07:00 |
I would have a lot more confidence in Nuclear power if they weren't built in places like Southern USA at the gulf of Mexico or in California along the San Andreas faultline. Thats just common sense!
|
"Death belongs to God alone. By what right do men touch that unknown thing"
Victor Hugo
|
|
JanusRook
Sultan
Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2419
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Feb-2007 at 17:57 |
I would have a lot more confidence in Nuclear power if they weren't
built in places like Southern USA at the gulf of Mexico or in
California along the San Andreas faultline. Thats just common sense!
|
So if those plants were decommissioned and double their number was built in say Montana you'd be okay with that?
|
Economic Communist, Political Progressive, Social Conservative.
Unless otherwise noted source is wiki.
|
|
Dawn
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3148
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Feb-2007 at 23:50 |
Originally posted by Zaitsev
. Solar and wind energy ARE NOT VIABLE. Just the land costs to build them are enormous, and they don't even produce enough energy to pay for their own construction.
|
acually that is not true. The wind turbines that are poping up an large numbers 40km from my place cost about a million dollars to build and pay for themselves in less that 5 years. produce enough electricity in 35 min of operation to supply a house for a month.
Their biggest flaw is that they are undependable in terms that you can't say forsure when the wind is going to blow,so they do not run at full capacity. When the have supplied there quota they are shut down. The biggest problem is there isn't the storage facility to store all the energy that they can produce for times when the wind isn't blowing.
Edited by Dawn - 21-Feb-2007 at 23:51
|
|