Nuclear power

[Dedalus]

If it were that or global warming, the catastrophic result of our current primary supply of power which is already in the process of biting us, and which is being made worse by the recent movement against nuclear power, then yes.

I am not advocating for the current alternatives - I am advocating for better ones than those that we currently have aside from the nuclear option - which as we have seen, can have lethal consequences on a massive scale.

If I had any kind of power plant in my backyard nuclear would be high on my preferred list.
Coal or oil (which the majority of plants in the U.S. are and (currently) nuclear is the most viable replacement option for these) would be so low as to be almost off the list.
Why are you against it?

1. Chernobyl
2. Fukushima

I'm not sure I "support" nuclear power, but I'm definitely not against it. I think realistically a lot of renewables are unreliable, and if people want to maintain their current lifestyle, we need nuclear power once fossil fuels run out. I think it's naive to think that society would support an option that would require them using less energy. Storing waste is an issue, but not an insurmountable one. There are risks: but risks that should be controllable with good safety precautions.

If the risks were mitigated accordingly and proven to work - I could be swayed to supporting it. Until then, (I am an optimist too) let's invent something safer that won't contribute to global warming.

 

[Second Summer]

I've just been to a talk about energy and how to feed a growing world population. Apparently nuclear energy is just a temporary solution. The energy needs of the future are going to be enormous - supposedly, we will have to build a new nuclear power plant every day forever. So in the long run, the only viable solutions are the photovoltaic options, which do have a fantastic potential if we can just develop the technology properly.

 

[das_nut]

I am against nuclear power. You play with a snake long enough and you're going to get bit, so the eventual accidents involving nuclear energy are going to happen - it's just a matter of when.

I'm curious if those in support would have any objection to having a power plant in their backyard.

Not really, if it was a modern Western plant.

I'm curious if those in support of renewable energy would object to living below a hydroelectric dam or underneath a wind turbine.

 

[das_nut]

2. Fukushima

Complete meltdown of several reactors. Let's see:

According to a June 2012 Stanford University study by John Ten Hoeve and Mark Z. Jacobson, the radiation released could cause 130 deaths from cancer (the lower bound for the estimater being 15 and the upper bound 1100) and 180 cancer cases (the lower bound being 24 and the upper bound 1800), mostly in Japan. Radiation exposure to workers at the plant was projected to result in 2 to 12 deaths.

(From Wikipedia).

That's about 2 days of traffic deaths in the United States.

If you think Fukushima is too dangerous, you've made a hell of an argument to ban automobiles. But I may be biased since my ride home involved someone trying to merge into my lane, then less than a mile later, I got to see a pickup driver on a cell phone fail to yield and almost hit another cyclist.

 

[Clueless Git]

I'm curious if those in support of renewable energy would object to living below a hydroelectric dam or underneath a wind turbine.

I did live under a wind turbine.

In the 80's I owned one of the houses on Energy World in Milton Keynes.

Mine was one of 10 houses that had their own private renewable electric energy source.

Basicaly that consisted of every house being plastered in photovoltaic panels, a shared wind turbine and battery shed.

The wind turbine was a fookin' nightmare when it ran.

 

[Blobbenstein]

It would be nice if the Sahara Desert could be used for mass energy generation; producing oils that could be shipped around the world....we need more research....

 

[Dropkick]

I read a report where they were setting up a series of motor controlled mirrors in the Mojave desert. The mirrors concentrate the sunlight on a boiler which is then used to run a steam turbine generator (the same thing used in most nuclear plants). Supposedly this is much more efficient than using photovoltaic panels (solar panels), and quite a bit less expensive to set up.
According to the report if they got the money and the go-ahead they were going to set up around a square mile of these and it would supply a large portion of Nevada's energy needs.

 

[yakherder]

I read a report where they were setting up a series of motor controlled mirrors in the Mojave desert. The mirrors concentrate the sunlight on a boiler which is then used to run a steam turbine generator (the same thing used in most nuclear plants). Supposedly this is much more efficient than using photovoltaic panels (solar panels), and quite a bit less expensive to set up.
According to the report if they got the money and the go-ahead they were going to set up around a square mile of these and it would supply a large portion of Nevada's energy needs.

The Nevada Army National Guard armory built a covered parking lot and covered the roof with panels that provide a large portion of its power. A rational investment in the middle of a desert, where the sky is pretty much always clear and sunny.

In any case, the panels themselves are still petroleum based products and require a substantial investment. It would be perfectly reasonable to strive for an increase in solar power in the long term. Nevada also has the Hoover Damn, which by default decreases its dependence on dirty or risky sources.

If only the rest of the world had access to the geothermal sources that Iceland has, it would be a fairly easy fix

 

[Dropkick]

In any case, the panels themselves are still petroleum based products and require a substantial investment. It would be perfectly reasonable to strive for an increase in solar power in the long term.

The system they were setting up had no solar panels. It had mirrors, that was one of the things I found most interesting about the idea.

 

[Andy_T]

Blast from the past?

No, unfortunately not. Recently in the news...

Fukushima nuclear reactor radiation at highest level since 2011 meltdown