Political Forums  

Go Back   Political Forums > Politicalchat.org discussion boards > Politics and the Environment

We appreciate your help

in keeping this site going.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 03-27-2014, 08:09 AM
4-2-7 4-2-7 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 4,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeG22 View Post
No please Japan don't give us that free energy source. I bet Obama's behind this. What's the big theory 4-2-7? Is Obama bringing it here to blow us all up?
Dumbest comment on the thread.

Free energy wow! Don't you think if it was free energy that Japan would not use it them selves?

I don't know if you heard about Fukushima going off line. Japan still has trouble meeting there energy demand. So smarty pants why would they not use it if it's free energy?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-27-2014, 08:26 AM
merrylander's Avatar
merrylander merrylander is offline
Resident octogenarian
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
And the NIH factor will prevent the U.S. from looking at the CANDU reactor. India last I heard was looking at running the ones they bought on Thorium.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-27-2014, 08:45 AM
MikeG22's Avatar
MikeG22 MikeG22 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 756
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4-2-7 View Post
Dumbest comment on the thread.

Free energy wow! Don't you think if it was free energy that Japan would not use it them selves?

I don't know if you heard about Fukushima going off line. Japan still has trouble meeting there energy demand. So smarty pants why would they not use it if it's free energy?
If free to us if they are paying us to take it and it is already enriched. You rebutted your own argument in your response. With Fukushima off line there is stockpiles of unusable energy. Its like having a shed full of wood pellets and no pellet stove.

Your comparing nuclear to coal or oil power generation? Do you realize how little air pollution nuclear creates vs energy it produces? Go with coal we don't have enough climate change.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-27-2014, 08:57 AM
4-2-7 4-2-7 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 4,454
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeG22 View Post
If free to us if they are paying us to take it and it is already enriched. You rebutted your own argument in your response. With Fukushima off line there is stockpiles of unusable energy. Its like having a shed full of wood pellets and no pellet stove.

Your comparing nuclear to coal or oil power generation? Do you realize how little air pollution nuclear creates vs energy it produces? Go with coal we don't have enough climate change.
Nuclear energy is powerful and clean I agree with that. It also has by products and faults.

If we built nuk plants they would be susceptible to forces out of our control. Once control is lost it's hazards are a 1000 times greater than any other source of energy. As with Fukushima and it's need for massive water cooling places the source to close to dangerous conditions.

Nothing is free....
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-27-2014, 09:10 AM
MikeG22's Avatar
MikeG22 MikeG22 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 756
I live very close to Indian Point nuclear power plant which supplies energy to NYC. The Kennedys and their riverkeeper group have been trying to shut this plant down as long as I've lived here. These morons built multimillion dollar mansions right near the existing plant and are now crying it's there. The only reason it still exists is there is no viable option to replace the amount of energy it creates very cleanly and efficiently. Best part is it sits on an inactive fault line.

Hopefully someday these alternative sources will be as clean and efficient. For now though using something intended to kill off human existence to power our homes sounds good to me. The by products are much less dangerous then the fuel BTW. Still extremely dangerous and will be for a long time but not mushroom cloud dangerous.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-27-2014, 09:33 AM
djv8ga djv8ga is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Open Border
Posts: 5,126
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeG22 View Post
I live very close to Indian Point nuclear power plant which supplies energy to NYC. The Kennedys and their riverkeeper group have been trying to shut this plant down as long as I've lived here. These morons built multimillion dollar mansions right near the existing plant and are now crying it's there. The only reason it still exists is there is no viable option to replace the amount of energy it creates very cleanly and efficiently. Best part is it sits on an inactive fault line.

Hopefully someday these alternative sources will be as clean and efficient. For now though using something intended to kill off human existence to power our homes sounds good to me. The by products are much less dangerous then the fuel BTW. Still extremely dangerous and will be for a long time but not mushroom cloud dangerous.
Look, this a stupid question, but I'm no expert in nuclear plants.
I heard an "expert" on the radio claim that the old rods were more radioactive than the new rods.
Is this true? If it is, why are they?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-27-2014, 09:46 AM
merrylander's Avatar
merrylander merrylander is offline
Resident octogenarian
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
Maybe this is what he was talking about

http://www.4-traders.com/news/Patent...wit--18164377/
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-27-2014, 09:58 AM
djv8ga djv8ga is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Open Border
Posts: 5,126
Could be. He was making the case to shut down all of the plants.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-27-2014, 10:03 AM
MikeG22's Avatar
MikeG22 MikeG22 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 756
Many of the usable isotopes come from spent fuel. The radiation for medical purposes for example. The problem with the spent fuel is it will around for a long long time. Hopefully someday there might be other uses for it.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-27-2014, 10:08 AM
merrylander's Avatar
merrylander merrylander is offline
Resident octogenarian
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 20,860
Thorium is being touted as a replacement fuel because it has such a high melting point.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people.
Eleanor Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:47 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.