RepoArt

InsaneKhorn (Thursday 4th of December 2008 03:42:34 PM)

yes, perhaps they are "easily" contained (remember, other forms of producing energy don't need any type of containing) but...where are you supposed to store them?

mkarnerfors (Thursday 4th of December 2008 06:49:01 AM)

Wind power and Solar do break even when it comes to returning the energy used to manufacture. One number I saw from Vestas is that the ratio is 35:1 for a wind turbine. Still, the environmental footprint per kWh is still more than for nuclear power plus that the poor availability of wind power makes it entirely unsuitable for our base load needs. Only three things can currently give us a reliable base load: hydro, coal, and nuclear.

mkarnerfors (Thursday 4th of December 2008 06:46:33 AM)

To look at the true cost of the energy we use, you do a so called Life Cycle Analysis (LCA). An LCA takes into account everything, from planning to construction to operating to decomissioning to eventual waste management. In LCA's, nuclear power in most cases fare better than wind and solar when it comes to environmental footprint per produced unit of energy. The reason wind and solar fare badly (compared to nuclear) is because you need *alot* of infrastructure to collect the same amount.

mkarnerfors (Thursday 4th of December 2008 06:42:55 AM)

I'm pro-nuclear... but what we don't need is a bunch of nutters making false statements because the anti-nukers jump at that like a shot. The fuel of a reactor is safe to handle, even hold in your hand. But some of the fission products are not. Especially Caesium 137, Strontium-90 and Iodine-131 are indeed much more radioactive than is the fuel. Not that this is a major problem because they are easilly contained, as is demonstrated by the test in the video.

insanepro28 (Wednesday 3rd of December 2008 09:11:06 PM)

IS THERE REALLY A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RADIOACTIVE URANIUM (RAW INGREDIENT OF NUCLEAR ENERGY) AND NUCLEAR WASTE?! The nuclear plants don't PRODUCE nuclear ANYTHING. They harness the power of something ALREADY radioactive. So don't go whining about these plants causing cancer without doing your research, "nkhx1"!

insanepro28 (Wednesday 3rd of December 2008 09:07:40 PM)

It's not just hippies that would complain about nuclear leakage! What if you lived near train tracks carrying nuclear material? What if there was a leak? Would you complain? If you don't, you'll die sooner because of nuclear poisoning.

BigMatt1225 (Tuesday 2nd of December 2008 10:09:30 PM)

fuck greenpeace, damn hippies and their flower power,they unbolted the engine. WINE WINE WINE thats all greenpeace does go hug a tree hippies!!!!!!!!!!!Tell you What greenpeace members, you wanna find out for sure? go to the next test crash, and to make sure you get a good view stand on the tracks that way you can see the train coming at you to make sure noone tampers with it, but dont move stay ther eone the tracks for the whole test!!!!! damn hippies

jimmyshitbags (Friday 28th of November 2008 12:39:54 PM)

what was their fucking problem, even if bolts were loosened or whatever, at the end of the day they crashed a train into the flask and it didnt break open...

chillybean08 (Wednesday 26th of November 2008 02:45:31 AM)

well actually it there was no driver it was kind of set up that the driver released the brakes from the outside of the train

superbrian113 (Sunday 23rd of November 2008 03:24:35 PM)

Did the driver remember to get off,,,,,