Embrace technology to turn nuclear energy into environmental solution

[misslexi]

From the Seattle Times:

"STEWART Brand, author of "The Whole Earth Catalog," visited Seattle last week, promoting his latest environmental manifesto and surprising more than a few members of the audience with his ideas about tackling our energy and climate crises.

In sum, while judging that solar and wind power are part of the mix of renewable energy sources required to sustain world living standards, Brand flatly asserts that we must rapidly deploy nuclear power plants to meet both environmental end energy goals."

Every now and then I run across a fine piece of raw meat to throw in Texas' cage, lol.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...st06alben.html

[Texas]

Originally Posted by misslexi

"we must rapidly deploy nuclear power plants to meet... environmental... goals."

I guess it all comes down to who's environmental goals. If we don't think about the environmental goals of future generations (thousands of years in the case of nuclear waste), perhaps that's being shortsighted and selfish.

[OPEC SUCKS]

France is mostly nuclear powered. In fact, they export electricity at a profit. And, their nuke power "waste" is stored at a single facility. A years supply of waste is about a small room full.

I don't post here anymore because of the preponderence of clueless enviro blowhards. I have links going back to 2008 showing this storage of nuke power gen waste is really a small issue. Trying to explain to the same blowhards. The problem is US regulations enacted during the Carter administration that forbid the reprocessing of nuclear fuel in the USA. Stupid. But if anyone that cares about the truth researches objectively France's path to energy independence, they will find and convince themselves that the anti nuke rant is total misunderstanding and misrepresentation. Then you will get pissed because we are all getting ripped off.

The former founder of Greenpeace came to the same conclusion as those in the OP. Some coincidence, huh ??

Ironic that our poster that goes by "Texas", when the state is a leader in nuclear power, and is aggressively expanding nuclear power generation, at a profit. He's probably using nuclear generated electricity right now. Maybe he is really French and in denial. What would you call it ?

After one iconic web blast I challenged the challenged one to provide a documented case of a single fatality or serious radiation injury at a nuclear facility in Texas. My challenge was that I would delete myself from this website and never return. He never offered to counter. And instead of stepping up with any credibility, he posted some cut and paste crap from some geek site. It looked really scary, but there wasn't a single event from Texas, or a single event from the USA at a single nuke plant. It had the Russian sub Kusrk in it. Duh.

That little exchange shows the character and integrity of the two sides of the issue. Greenpeace, The whole Earth Catalog, reformed hippies. They grew up. Two sides, One Bull****, riding a wave of, and endlessly repeating media hysteria and college boy crap, and one sitting down calmly with some facts. There are a lot of jokes where texas is the subject of Bull****. Walking, talking, stalking.

[Texas]

Originally Posted by OPEC SUCKS

France is mostly nuclear powered. In fact, they export electricity at a profit. And, their nuke power "waste" is stored at a single facility. A years supply of waste is about a small room full.

I don't post here anymore because of the preponderence of clueless enviro blowhards. I have links going back to 2008 showing this storage of nuke power gen waste is really a small issue. Trying to explain to the same blowhards. The problem is US regulations enacted during the Carter administration that forbid the reprocessing of nuclear fuel in the USA. Stupid. But if anyone that cares about the truth researches objectively France's path to energy independence, they will find and convince themselves that the anti nuke rant is total misunderstanding and misrepresentation. Then you will get pissed because we are all getting ripped off.

The former founder of Greenpeace came to the same conclusion as those in the OP. Some coincidence, huh ??

Ironic that our poster that goes by "Texas", when the state is a leader in nuclear power, and is aggressively expanding nuclear power generation, at a profit. He's probably using nuclear generated electricity right now. Maybe he is really French and in denial. What would you call it ?

After one iconic web blast I challenged the challenged one to provide a documented case of a single fatality or serious radiation injury at a nuclear facility in Texas. My challenge was that I would delete myself from this website and never return. He never offered to counter. And instead of stepping up with any credibility, he posted some cut and paste crap from some geek site. It looked really scary, but there wasn't a single event from Texas, or a single event from the USA at a single nuke plant. It had the Russian sub Kusrk in it. Duh.

That little exchange shows the character and integrity of the two sides of the issue. Greenpeace, The whole Earth Catalog, reformed hippies. They grew up. Two sides, One Bull****, riding a wave of, and endlessly repeating media hysteria and college boy crap, and one sitting down calmly with some facts. There are a lot of jokes where texas is the subject of Bull****. Walking, talking, stalking.

You can now hear the frustration and desperation in OPEC SUCKS writing. So sad for him because most decision makers have given up on nuclear fission power plants. Don't ask OPEC SUCKS for the current adoption numbers because it will make him even more upset.

There is no need to say anymore on the topic. Nuclear fission is dead for many reasons, mostly because the cost is just too high when compared to other options. The nuclear environmental disaster in the making is just extra to make those that put so much into the nuclear effort and cannot let go of the sunk costs finally accept their fate.

Commercial nuclear fission: RIP


P.S. OPEC SUCKS, if and when humanity makes the horrible decision to turn back and take another look at nuclear waste generation, like that Green Peace member that felt there were no viable options to fix global warming, please come back and give us a heads up. We can debate the topic at that time. Until then, relax.

[Altazi]

Originally Posted by Texas

You can now hear the frustration and desperation in OPEC SUCKS writing. So sad for him because most decision makers have given up on nuclear fission power plants. Don't ask OPEC SUCKS for the current adoption numbers because it will make him even more upset.

There is no need to say anymore on the topic. Nuclear fusion is dead for many reasons, mostly because the cost is just too high when compared to other options. The nuclear environmental disaster in the making is just extra to make those that put so much into the nuclear effort and cannot let go of the sunk costs finally accept their fate.

Commercial nuclear fusion: RIP


P.S. OPEC SUCKS, if and when humanity makes the horrible decision to turn back and take another look at nuclear waste generation, like that Green Peace member that felt there were no viable options to fix global warming, please come back and give us a heads up. We can debate the topic at that time. Until then, relax.

Did you mean to jump from nuclear fission to nuclear fusion? It's not really appropriate to discuss whether commercial nuclear fusion is dead, since it hasn't even taken off yet. There are promising technologies in the field, but it is too soon to write them off as commercially unviable.

[Texas]

Originally Posted by Altazi

Did you mean to jump from nuclear fission to nuclear fusion? It's not really appropriate to discuss whether commercial nuclear fusion is dead, since it hasn't even taken off yet. There are promising technologies in the field, but it is too soon to write them off as commercially unviable.

Thank you, I fixed it.