nuclear power - yes or no?

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

Jenn - posted on 03/17/2011

2,683

36

93

Here is a breakdown of what nuclear medicine is. A majority of the world's medical isotopes come from Chalk River, Ontario.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_med...

And considering the fact that about 20% of the power in the US comes from nuclear power, I just don't see that happening - like ever. And the way it works, is that you would have black-outs, it doesn't work that just everyone loses a bit of power.

Nikki - posted on 03/15/2011

5,263

41

558

I am so glad I live in Australia! Nuclear power would scare the crap out of me! I have been reading about the meltdown in Chernobyl to try and gain some understanding of how it all works, my little cousin is in Japan at the moment so it all freaks me out.

Where I live we have hydro power and natural gas. A lot of people over here use solar power because the government provides rebates on installation, I think it should be mandatory for all new houses anywhere in the world to have solar power for at least their hot water systems, imagine the resources that could be saved.

[deleted account]

If people would only realize we NEED to conserve or the planet will DIE...
It is feasible to change the world. Each person needs to be the change they want to see.

Krista - posted on 03/15/2011

12,562

16

842

Personally, I think it's foolish for us to put all of our eggs into any one energy basket. Wind, solar and tidal energies may not provide enough energy for our needs, but I think it IS crucial to have them in place in case problems develop with a nation's primary energy source.

With regards to nuclear energy itself, I think it can be safe, if the proper homework is done. Not building them on fault lines would be a good start, no? The thing is, it's an industry that MUST be stringently regulated. We do not dare depend on the nuclear industry to self-regulate, because when your primary motive is profit, how long will it take before corners start being cut?

I think that nuclear technology has its place, particularly with regards to nuclear medicine. However, I think that as a society, we are either uninformed and fearful about it, or uninformed and cavalier about it. It is absolutely crucial that more research be done, and that standards be painfully stringent, and that companies are rewarded (via tax breaks, perhaps) for not just meeting the safety standards, but exceeding them.

Sharon - posted on 03/15/2011

11,585

12

1314

I don't think our alternatives will generate enough power.

I love the idea of tidal generators but I have no idea how many it would take to power california and have extra power to send else where without destroying most of the sealife near it/them.

Wind turbines, solar panels, - AWESOME - I have a friend who works for a wind turbine research group. She can't mention specifics but she suggests that the danger of windturbines to wildlife is grossly exaggerated.

for those of you who want alternatives..

Where do you propose these alternatives be located?

Everytime a site is proposed it faces a major fight with environmentalists, homeowners, etc.

I think we need nuclear power - at least for now. I think all homes need to be built & designed to use as much natural power and be energy efficient as possible. IE solar tubes, sunlight panels, solar panels, specially insulated walls to retain heat/cold & keep the opposite out, etc. I think recycled materials need to be mandatory.

OOPS I slipped off track. Oh hell, I derailed...

If you see this, leave this form field blank.
Powered by RESPECT not THUMPS

40 Comments

View replies by

ME - posted on 03/17/2011

2,978

18

190

I live near a couple of plants in IL...my preference would be that we develop sustainable sources of power and phase out nuclear rather than spending billions of dollars updating our ancient nuclear plants...

Johnny - posted on 03/17/2011

8,686

26

318

Jenny, I'll send you some stuff. I've got loads of it on my computer at work. The tyee.ca is a great source for that stuff if you're looking on your own. There is a guy who is also really active in fighting the big power companies in Alberta who publishes a lot of stuff about the power industry and their lies in Western Canada. But I'll put some links on your Facebook.

I do not think that Fortis is as bad as BC Hydro, but they are still involved. It sort of works like BC sells to the US, and Alberta sells to BC.

Here's a link to get you started:
http://www.greenenergybc.ca/alberta.html

I'll be back at work Monday.

[deleted account]

What we do in the meantime is shut down all of the power plants that cause pollution. For those who need to do without power, tough. Limit each household to a set amount that would sustain heat and food prep. Then invest money into all renewable sources and research. Within a short period of time, you bet an alternative would exist. Greedy people would make sure of that.
I am not to familiar with nuclear medicine so i can't say for or against.

Jenn - posted on 03/17/2011

2,683

36

93

That sounds all nice and peachy, but how do we do that? And what do we do in the meantime?

Just curious for those that are against nuclear power, are you also against nuclear medicine?

Jenny - posted on 03/17/2011

4,426

16

126

That's the problem. Keeping nuclear power safe relies on people and people are fallible and many of us are motivated by greed. This stuff lasts for thousands of years, can we expect that we can keep it completely safe for all that time? Every landmass we have is built by volcanoes and earthquakes and tectonic plate shift. Can we REALLY believe we can build these reactors safely while dealing with EVERYTHING mother nature hurls at us? What about an asteroid? We are not worthy enough to handle this technology at this point, it is just not safe enough.



BTW neither is oil, far too many of us have died in the name of fossil fuels too.



We just need to get our shit together and really put some effort into sustainable sources and taking our technology to the limit in the name of sustainabilty and a safe planet and ecosystem. Our future depends on it.

Dana - posted on 03/17/2011

11,264

35

489

Tracey, it's being reported, here in the US, that the company that owns the plants in Japan might actually have been cutting some corners.

Jenny - posted on 03/17/2011

4,426

16

126

Do you have a link Carol? I've been trying to find specific information with no luck. I just get overviews of "The majority of BC's power is generated by Hydroelectric dams" kind of stuff but no specific stats. I've heard we sell off some of it but not about the essential trading of dirty power for greener power wioth a surcharge. I'm not under BC Hydro, my area is serviced by FortisBC through City of Kelowna.

Sneaky - posted on 03/16/2011

1,170

33

130

I'm in Australia and my vote is: Hell Yes! Aside from being one of the most geologically stable continents in the world we also seem to have most of the untapped uranium resources in the world too . . .

BTW, I am REALLY surprised at how much trouble the Japanese are having with their reactors post earthquake - I thought that they would be mostly earthquake proof (even up to a 9 pointer) :o(

Johnny - posted on 03/16/2011

8,686

26

318

Actually Jenny, that is not the case. British Columbia generates hydro power which it often sells to other provinces and particularly to the US. BC Hydro can charge a premium for "sustainably produced power" out of province, whereas here, all power is sold at the same rate. They then import gas and coal produced power to meet local needs. It's one of BC's dirty little secrets.

All those lovely wind farms they are planning to build and run-of-river projects.... those are designed to meet California standards for renewable power. California pays almost double per kilowatt hour for renewable source power as it does for other forms.

Jenn - posted on 03/16/2011

2,683

36

93

What alternatives are there though? And unfortunately, much of our power also comes from Nanticoke (which is the area I live in) at the OPG plant and is one of the top 10 single sources of greenhouse gases in Canada. It supplies about 15% of Ontario's power, with hydro providing some, as well as a few small scale wind and solar farms, then we also buy power from the US - not exactly sure where from or what sources though.

Charlie - posted on 03/16/2011

11,203

111

401

Im not sure to be honest but I know our area is putting in a wind turbine farm and using tidal generators so Im happy we are at least trying small scale in our area .

Jenny - posted on 03/16/2011

4,426

16

126

There are many alternatives but the technology is not explored due to money. They don't want to invest in something that can't potentially gaurantee generations of profits. They can't find that model with sustainable sources so until we remove money from the equation it will never happen. We will kill ourselves long before we learn our lesson. Money is fucking evil.

Jenn - posted on 03/16/2011

2,683

36

93

I'll let you be the one to wire it into the grid Julianne. So what sustainable sources then Jenny? And I think you and Julianne both make a good point, but a very unrealistic one.

[deleted account]

maybe if we got our solar power from space...the atmosphere prevents a lot of the rays from getting in to the earth, same with the clouds on bad days.....if there were a way to collect it in space and take it here.....just a thought.

Jenny - posted on 03/16/2011

4,426

16

126

Sustainable sources or bust. Then we are forced to adjust our lifestyle to live within the safe energy amounts we can generate. NOTHING is worth killing our planet over, absolutely nothing.

Jenn - posted on 03/16/2011

2,683

36

93

So what do you suggest then Jenny? Coal fired power that we currently use is not a renewable resource and can kill you with all of the shit that it emits into the air. So by your standards that's not an option either. Wind and solar just don't make enough power. What else would you suggest, other than hydro-electric which we also already use, but again doesn't create enough power for everyone.

Jenn - posted on 03/16/2011

2,683

36

93

So what do you suggest then Jenny? Coal fired power that we currently use is not a renewable resource and can kill you with all of the shit that it emits into the air. So by your standards that's not an option either. Wind and solar just don't make enough power. What else would you suggest, other than hydro-electric which we also already use, but again doesn't create enough power for everyone.

Jenny - posted on 03/16/2011

4,426

16

126

Fuck no! No, no, no, no.

It is not worth it. I don't care if it shuts down every economy is the world, if it's not renewable it shouldn't be an option. If it can kill you, it shouldn't be an option. If it can destroy our planet it shouldn't be an option. Like not even in the maybe pile. It pisses me off that I have no nuclear in my area and yet I can still be affected by the plants south of me. Radiation doesn't stop at the border. "Can" be safe is not good enough. No to nuclear.

Jenn - posted on 03/16/2011

2,683

36

93

We also have several large wind farms around here but people that live near them all complain of health issues now. Lots of farmers are also using the solar program being offered by the gov't and installing large solar panels in their fields.

Jenn - posted on 03/16/2011

2,683

36

93

I'm all for nuclear and wish they'd build the plant here that they proposed. I also think that the coal plant that we already have here should not close down as proposed by the gov't. If they had only just spent the money on the proper scrubbers instead of spending the money on wasted research looking for alternatives, we'd still be operating at full speed with less of an environmental impact.

[deleted account]

It is better than burning fossil fuels. I'm not going to lose faith that people will eventually do the right thing.

Johnny - posted on 03/15/2011

8,686

26

318

Julianne, that is a lovely dream. But most people have absolutely no interest in making a single sacrifice to their living standards or conveniences to save the planet. I used to think like you, but I've come to realize that we are just going to end up like the Easter Islanders. We will be driving our SUV's, full of our plastic bagged meat-laiden processed grocery products from our air-conditioned grocery store to our air-conditioned home where we left all the electronics to keep the cats company as the giant forest/grass fires burn on one side of town and a huge hurricane sweeps in on the other.

Just look at the people posting about how human-caused climate change is made-up in the other thread about ridiculous ideas. We are very happy to plug our ears and sing la-la-la-la as long as we don't have to give up the stuff we like.

So unless we want to create more air pollution and lop off more mountain tops to produce coal energy, nuclear is probably the best choice to supplement renewables. They simply are not going to be enough for our selfish culture.

Dana - posted on 03/15/2011

11,264

35

489

Well yes, that would be nice but, it would still not be enough. It also isn't feasible to count on everyone else to be that conservative.

[deleted account]

Well maybe if we decreased the amount of power each individual person used then solar wind and water power would be enough for everyone.Some things people use power for are completely useless. If we just went with the necessity and worked to make our appliances more efficient, it would be enough. We are extremely wasteful with power, we need to conserve all of our resources.

Dana - posted on 03/15/2011

11,264

35

489

Kati, I can beat that....I live 15 miles away from a nuclear plant and mine is ON a fault line. :) But, honestly, I'm not that worried about it. I don't think they're the big "evil" that many make them out to be.

Johnny - posted on 03/15/2011

8,686

26

318

I completely agree with Krista's assessment of the situation.

I work for an electrical cable distributor. Part of my job involves tracking new power generating projects. Most of you know that I am quite passionate about the environment, but sadly, wind, hydro, tidal, and solar power simply can not generate enough to meet our needs. Not even if we get rid of all the crazy politics, NIMBYism, and build out capacity in those areas. A combination of all of those alternatives (which each have their own risks and negatives as well) should be promoted and it would make a big difference. But we would still need to generate a good portion of our needs through more traditional, non-renewable means.

The biggest problem with nuclear power generation is not the risk of meltdown. Statistically, it is highly improbable and does less environmental and human damage when it does occur that other forms of power generation such as coal. However, the big problem is how to dispose of the used and irradiated material. There is currently no good way for this to be done, and for me, it is a good reason to pursue other strategies before turning to nuclear power.

The level of misinformation and ignorance on this issue is simply astounding though. I think that will be enough to put a lid on any future development in that area for quite some time. You just need to watch 5 minutes of the news to see that the least informed seem to get the most play.

Rosie - posted on 03/15/2011

8,657

30

315

i live 15 miles from the only nuclear power plant in iowa. it freaks me out that in our phonebook is a detailed plan on what to do in case of a nuclear meltdown. WHY on earth would we think using nuclear power is a good thing? i don't get it. so no, i dont' think we should expand. there were talks about building another plant here in iowa, and now that this has happened in japan the talks have halted. hopefully for good.
i'm not keen on other sources of energy that pollute our air. i would like to see us rely completely on wind and solar energy. 1 turbine creates enough energy each year to power a 1,000 households. where we would put all of those 307,000 + wind turbines is the question. maybe tear down all of the nuclear, and coal plants? IDK, lol!

Dana - posted on 03/15/2011

11,264

35

489

You're right Sharon, they (turbines and solar energy) just simply don't generate enough power.

Sharon - posted on 03/15/2011

11,585

12

1314

nah - its not that simple. How energy do those things generate? where do you put them? Do you know how many it would take to power a city? neighborhood? etc. BUT making homes more energy efficient would be damned nice to curb the need for more energy.

politics. Thats why they aren't mandatory = but there will come a day when it will be. Like limiting children born to a family and outlawing child slave labor - there will come a day.

Dana - posted on 03/15/2011

11,264

35

489

I think so, if we do it safely and quit building them on fault lines. They've also "said" that we have more back up energy for our plants than the Japanese had, which is why their plants are melting down.

I also think it's cleaner than anything we have right now.

♏*PHOENIX*♏ - posted on 03/15/2011

4,455

6

379

I was thinking Solar and/or windturbines
Maybe its not as simple as that…..??

Why cant we make these things mandatory?

Amy - posted on 03/15/2011

4,793

17

369

They may change their minds on expansion after a few weeks if the problems in Japan start really impacting the environment and the countries surrounding it. I personally wish we didn't have anything nuclear. I heard within ten days 750 RADS are to be covering California within ten days of the explosion. I thought that was a pretty dangerous level.

If you see this, leave this form field blank.
Powered by RESPECT not THUMPS

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms