By: bobsjc
30/03/2008
1:54 pm Yahoo! Profile:
bobsjc Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Nuclear power will come but maybe not in our generation. Great advances have been made in safety and Chernoble was caused through poor maitainence I believe, and yes that could happen here but you could walk down the footpath and the clown driving half a ton of steel could run you over.
Lets istall and maintain the nuclear plant with care and consideration and it will serve us and our future for years to come.
We can still have our (clean green country) and more of it because we will not be flooding it with water (in the guise of irrigation)for hydro dams.
See the attached link and count the number of nuclear plants there are world wide.
http://www.insc.anl.gov/pwrmaps/map/world_map.php |
|
By: alanhartmeier
31/03/2008
3:51 am Yahoo! Profile:
alanhartmeier Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
A nuclear plant consumes MORE energy than it produces.
Today all energy INPUT to run a nuclear plant, comes from fossil fuels, mainly Diesel.
You need to add ALL energy INPUT like: Building the plant, mining all materials to build the plant, mining the Uranium, transporting it etc. etc. THEN after about 50 years, to demolish the plant, process the highly nuclear material, dig it deep into the ground, AND CARE FOR IT FOR THE NEXT 10000 YEARS, until it is not dangerous anymore. All this energy INPUT (in form of DIESEL) is HIGHER, than the OUTPUT (in form of electricity) of the nuclear plant!
So why do businessmen wanna do it? Very simple. For energy INPUT they use mostly DIESEL which is a lot cheaper than the electrcicity they sell. The nuclear plant gets HEAVILY subsidized by taxpayers money, and at then end of it the businessmen make a monetary PROFIT, WIHOUT HAVING PRODUCED ANYTHING AT ALL. THEY HAVE SPENT MORE ENERGY, THAN THEY PRODUCED, BUT STILL THEY MADE A PROFIT. It is a cheap, perverse salesman trick in massive proportions....
It is a scam, that has been going on in other parts of the world for decades and unfortunately many people still fall for it..... It is nothing else than buying energy cheap, and selling it more expensive. It would be MORE efficient and cheaper to just build Diesel Generators and produce the electricity from the Diesel directly. However, taxpayers would not subsidize something like that, so the businessmen use the media and cry about air pollution. They simple hide the facts of all DIESEL BURNED TO BUILD THE PLANT, RUN IT, DEMOLISH IT AND CARE FOR ITS NUCLEAR POISON FOR 10000 YEARS.
The proof will finally become visible to everyone, when the fossil fuels of this world are finnished:
As soon as the fossil fuels are finnished, ALL NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS WILL STAND STILL! Because there will be no more Diesel machines, mining the Uranium, Diesel-Ships and Trucks to transport it, Diesel machines to dig holes to store the nucle ... |
|
By: noozilander
31/03/2008
4:58 am Yahoo! Profile:
noozilander Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Coal fired plant, 3 million tonnes of coal, is equal to Nuclear plant, 1 tonne of uranium. Also takes a lot more diesel to mine 3 million of anything than 1. Nuclear will extend the reserve life of fossil fuels, so mining equipment will be around longer. David Lange really did a number on us, didn't he. |
|
By: rachmorrell
14/04/2008
8:19 am Yahoo! Profile:
rachmorrell Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| never |
|
By: powley9
14/04/2008
8:45 am Yahoo! Profile:
powley9 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| being nuclear free is the best thing this country has done for many many years people with even half a brain admire us for doing that yet we here the call for nuclear power from people that are just to miserable and tight fisted to see past their own nose. |
|
By: xtr365705@xtra.co.nz
14/04/2008
9:08 am Yahoo! Profile:
xtr365705@xtra.co.nz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| You should go and ask all those people in the Wairau Valley area and see what they think about it. Plans are afoot to boot them out of their homes, and off their lands, so that yet another dam can be built. The soil we walk on is a diminishing item because of the massive erosion we have around the world, yet while many many countries are trying to reclaim it here in NZ the idiots want to flood it and turn it into lakes. As I have said on another posting; the bludgers at the Tiwai Pt. aluminium works should be held to account for the huge ammount of power they suck off the main grid at bargain basement prices. Time this lot started to arrange some of their very own generation then we wouldn't have such a bleat about where we're going in the future. |
|
By: powley9
14/04/2008
9:32 am Yahoo! Profile:
powley9 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| better a few people having to move which they get money for dont worry about that then generations of deformed childern |
|
By: xtr365705@xtra.co.nz
14/04/2008
10:37 am Yahoo! Profile:
xtr365705@xtra.co.nz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I think we're all waiting for your bright ideas on how we're going to get enough power for the estimated 8 million in the not too distant future. Okay to bleat on about people glowing in the dart but where are the ideas. Remember it's an estimated 8 millions we're talking about. We're nearly screwed now. |
|
By: powley9
14/04/2008
11:38 am Yahoo! Profile:
powley9 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| use less solar power wind power tide power and where u get the 8 million from we are loosing people not gaining. |
|
By: xtr365705@xtra.co.nz
14/04/2008
12:04 pm Yahoo! Profile:
xtr365705@xtra.co.nz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I would take a guess that by the end of this century the population will be close to 8m. Interesting to see that you said use LESS solar,wind and tide power. Interesting. Now where are you going to get it from ? |
|
By: xtr365705@xtra.co.nz
14/04/2008
12:08 pm Yahoo! Profile:
xtr365705@xtra.co.nz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I've based my pop. stats on the possibility that there will be a huge number of asians coming to NZ to live. The political in this country seem to be steering us into a situation where we will become a satellite of the likes of China, possibly India. If an open door immigration is stopped then the pop. will probably be around 5m by 2050. |
|
By: powley9
14/04/2008
12:37 pm Yahoo! Profile:
powley9 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| thats ok if the pop is going to be 8 most asian they wont need power just a few cardboard boxes will do. |
|
By: noozilander
14/04/2008
12:38 pm Yahoo! Profile:
noozilander Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
The same people who fear Nuclear Power, probably worry about Global Warming and atmospheric carbon content. If we overcome our fear of nuclear, then we can create electrical energy with the lowest carbon output of any option... by far!
What happened in the U.S.S.R. was a design flaw or operator error caused directly by the political structure of the day. In the west, safety is and has always been the paramount consideration in Nuclear Power Plants. It's time for nuclear power. Then we may be able to stop selling our coal to China, where they burn it to produce power and destroy the atmosphere. Don't forget the ratio: 3 million kilos of coal = 1 kilo of uranium for thermal energy. |
|
By: xtr365705@xtra.co.nz
14/04/2008
12:41 pm Yahoo! Profile:
xtr365705@xtra.co.nz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Well I think you've done an outstanding job. You say the population is getting less, you say use LESS solar,wind and tidal power[must have something to do with your shrinking pop.] and now you have the 'new settlers' living in boxes. |
|
By: dhume200
14/04/2008
12:51 pm Yahoo! Profile:
dhume200 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Where do you propose we store all the dangerous nuclear waste noozilander. If the whole world goes nuclear, we are going to have vast stashes of highly toxic waste everywhere. Also there is only a finite uranium supply. Renewable energy the way to go! |
|
By: noozilander
14/04/2008
1:20 pm Yahoo! Profile:
noozilander Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
dhume, we could fire the waste into deep space (which is already highly radioactive anyway) and the payload wouldn't weigh much, considering there would be only a small amount of waste material.
There is only a finite supply of uranium, but there is heaps of it and new technologies like Fusion (fusing instead of splitting atoms) reactors are not far off.
If renewable energies were enough, why are we constantly facing shortages? Renewable energy is not sufficient to supply demand and will never keep up. |
|
By: xtr365705@xtra.co.nz
14/04/2008
1:31 pm Yahoo! Profile:
xtr365705@xtra.co.nz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| dhume;Where to put the nuclear waste ? I don't want to sound like a smart ass but I would build a facility very similar to another, not talked about, type that exists today. For over 100yrs quite a few nutcase countries have been manufacturing and storing some of the worst types of bio weapons man can think of. Some, that if leaked would not only take out an area of 16sq. miles [as with Chernobyl disaster] but the entire population of planet earth. These things are in capsules[which can break]artillery shells, missile warheads [which have use by dates]and many other 'delivery' systems. The storage of nuclear waste pales in comparison to this evil stuff yet is is stored in secure areas and I have yet to read about an accidental leakage anywhere. And nobody denies the benefits of renewable energy but 'renewable' is only so for so long and not the complete answer to our power needs in the future. I believe the Chinese are building 2 coal powered power stations PER WEEK and what a choker this is going to be for planet earth. Worried about nuclear waste ? The Chines will have killed us with their smog before that becomes a problem. |
|
By: dhume200
14/04/2008
1:36 pm Yahoo! Profile:
dhume200 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
I still don't like the idea of storing an ever increasing dupply of toxic substances (no matter how secure xtr).
When Fusion power comes along as noozi thinks is not too far off, then I think that is close to being an ideal power source. I am lead to believe that the only stumbling block with this energy sourcfe so far is that we haven't invented materials that are capable containing the fusion as it creates so much heat. Hopefully the scientists will come up with a compound that can do this pretty soon! |
|
By: xtr365705@xtra.co.nz
14/04/2008
1:49 pm Yahoo! Profile:
xtr365705@xtra.co.nz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| dhume; Agreed fusion power would be great if harnessed. Believe me, if there was another 'constant' source of power generation other than one that has 'waste' detrimental to our species then I'm for it. We live in hope. |
|
By: noozilander
14/04/2008
2:00 pm Yahoo! Profile:
noozilander Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| A large Fusion reactor is currently being built in France. Fusion power production has been estimated commercially available in 50 to 100 years. Until then nuclear fission remains the best alternative. |
|
By: ophiuchus14
14/04/2008
2:49 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ophiuchus14 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| There's always tidal power |
|
By: nicolte
14/04/2008
3:08 pm Yahoo! Profile:
nicolte Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| ophiuchus14 - are you sure you are a teen? You're a clever bugger for someone still going to school. Haven't you got better things to do with your time than chatting with us mostly 40 plus old codgers? :-) |
|
By: danforbes@xtra.co.nz
14/04/2008
3:43 pm Yahoo! Profile:
danforbes@xtra.co.nz Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Sorry Noozie but I disagree with your fusion idea, notice the only place fusion is taking place is the Sun. Fusing Hydrogen into Helium and it takes extremely high temperatures and pressure to do that. How are we going to do that on this planet safely as cold fusion is just not an option? |
|
By: noozilander
14/04/2008
4:03 pm Yahoo! Profile:
noozilander Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Hi Dan. They have a thing called a tokamak which is essentially shaped like a donut and it can suspend the plasma generated by two opposing magnetic fields. Apparently they have safely contained reactions of 300 million degrees Celsius, but they need to achieve over 500 million Celsius to spark proper fusion. I think the big reactor in France is to take them closer to the desired effect. It is mind-blowing stuff, but some really clever people are onto it. Just google 'fusion power' and there is a lot of fascinating reading about this topic. |
|
By: noozilander
14/04/2008
4:58 pm Yahoo! Profile:
noozilander Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| Sorry, some incorrect info there. They have attained 300 million degrees and this is enough for fusion ignition. There are other engineering problems yet to be solved to make it viable. Holy Grail stuff, this. |
|
