... to me nuclar power is completly fine... i dont sem to have a problem... its just common people have a frar of mutation and monster and stuff... if properly taken care of they would be okay.... what doyou think
I perfer nuclear now. But I expect something much better within the next 50 years. I would be very upset if I had to continue using non-renewable and dirty energy for my entire life. It pollutes the world and should be replaced by something cleaner and more efficent.
yes of course they are but im just mentioning one. And think like solar power cant generate enough for the whole earth. unless we put the desert and stuff full of them. And Wind energy takes a lot space to and it is ugly. So i defeated 2 more options. kind a. for me.
solar power cant generate enough for the whole earth. unless we put the desert and stuff full of them. And Wind energy takes a lot space to and it is ugly. So i defeated 2 more options. kind a. for me.
in the middle of the ocean? your not realy going to see that. are you? also i find "because it is ugly" not a good reason to pollute the world to it's destruction. (or atleast large parts of the world)
and sun energy can very well be used in combination whit other energy sources. when you have a roof. drop some solar penels on them and you already got some free energy. and there are enoufg roofs to replace a few nuclear power stations.
The Vatican City has installed a massive network of solar panels on all the roofs. Here's some info and along with some nice photos: [url]http://inhabitat.com/vatican-to-build-europes-largest-solar-power-plant/[/url]
he said solar penels in the dessert. i said windmills in the ocean =)
And nuclear power plants don't even make so much nuclear waste, it mainly just makes alot of steam.
wiki quote:
High-level waste (HLW) is produced by nuclear reactors. It contains fission products and transuranic elements generated in the reactor core. It is highly radioactive and often thermally hot. HLW accounts for over 95 percent of the total radioactivity produced in the process of nuclear electricity generation. The amount of HLW worldwide is currently increasing by about 12,000 metric tons every year, which is the equivalent to about 100 double-decker buses or a two-story structure with a footprint the size of a basketball court.[21] A 1000-MWe nuclear power plant produces about 27 tonnes of spent nuclear fuel (unreprocessed) every year.
27 times 10.000 = 270.000 tonnes from 1 nuclear plant. wich is a 20.000 story high structer. or 100.000 double-decker buses. there are 432 power plants on the world (and 65 in the making 27 times 432 = 11664 tonnes eatch year. is after 10.000 year a total 116.640.000 tonnes. wich is a 8.640.000 story structer. or 43.200.000 double-decker buses.
well i don't call that. "not much waste"
alsois this not the only waste. you also have low and intermediate level waste aswell as transuranic waste
Partydevil, when you can find the money to solar panelize the Ocean in a safe and secure manner that transmits energy and keeps the panels safe from the raging hell the ocean is, you can say solar energy is a good option.
Also, you act as if Solar Panels are some major key to the earth. Current Solar Panels die. They don't last forever. They need to be maintained. Otherwise, don't you think every roof on earth would have them? In the US, it takes around 25 years for Solar panels to pay themselves off. But guess what, by then, you need new ones, so you're adding hassle if nothing else to your problem.
Furthermore, wind energy sounds beautiful, but it is not a constant. The wind doesn't always push at the same strength daily, so it canno be your only source of energy [Not to mention, in many environments, wind energy is very pointless] And of course, like all things, requires initial investment.
Besides, we can fill up the the world's deserts with all that nuclear waste.
I'm not arguing and saying that Nuclear is better than other alternative options, but it is a good, long term solution to our energy problem. If other alternatives are found in the course of its existence, then they can be implemented instead. I don't think completely outlawing Nuclear power and saying 'Solar, Wind, or nothing!' is the safe way to go. That will just compel people to say 'Screw it, the other two aren't good enough yet we'll just keep burning coal'.
and sun energy can very well be used in combination whit other energy sources. when you have a roof. drop some solar penels on them and you already got some free energy. and there are enoufg roofs to replace a few nuclear power stations.
There may be enough roofs but take THE Netherlands. I think we have 150 sunny days in à year. And i think 40 of them are days while it is sunny the whole day.
So there are enough roofs but not enough sun time to provide the world of solar power.
And horizon pollution is a reason. I mean take my town. We are grown out of a beautiful fishing village with a great and amazing view from the lighthouse. And now they are planning to store over a hundred windmills in the IJsselmeer. And they won't even make profit of it.
