Is nuclear power a good thing?

Discussion in 'U.K.' started by DoktorAtomik, Aug 30, 2004.

?

What are your views on nuclear power?

  1. Nuclear power is safe enough to use

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Nuclear power is too dangerous to use

    7 vote(s)
    30.4%
  3. I'm undecided

    16 vote(s)
    69.6%
  1. DoktorAtomik

    DoktorAtomik Closed For Business

    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    What do you all think, eh?
     
  2. matthew

    matthew Almost sexy

    Messages:
    9,292
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think it is safe ... i hear lots about it being unsafe but i am not scared...

    Maybe questioning its safety is unfair ...because it is safe .

    Should it be used ...yes i think it should.

    http://www.ecolo.org/base/baseen.htm

    Humans are selfish. FACT.
     
  3. DoktorAtomik

    DoktorAtomik Closed For Business

    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's ridiculous. So not only do you support nuclear power, but now you're arguing that we shouldn't even talk about it and question its safety?!?


    It's beyond me how you can describe something that produced Chernobyl as 'safe'.
     
  4. adigaskell

    adigaskell Member

    Messages:
    154
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mathew, the author of that website you mention, together with James Goldsmith (editor of Ecologist) have written an article on the pros and cons of nuclear power.

    If you want to have a look it makes interesting reading.
     
  5. kier

    kier I R Baboon

    Messages:
    1,907
    Likes Received:
    1
    do you know how they get rid of a nuclear power station?


    no?

    they don't, their current method is to pour thousands of tonnes of concrete on it, cross their fingers, and hope for the best.

    the nuclear core glows, emits vast amounts of radiation, and if disasters happen then whole areas are wiped out (even now, there are glow-in-the-dark sheep, and radioactive hillsides in parts of wales).

    whether you aggree their is a threat from terrorists, or not, you are providing a bomb, all that is needed is a trigger.

    this is an easy short term solution, with many long term problems...when there are other alternatives this path should not be taken
     
  6. Spyder

    Spyder La dah de dah

    Messages:
    1,855
    Likes Received:
    2
  7. matthew

    matthew Almost sexy

    Messages:
    9,292
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nuclear power is safe..people using it are unsafe. Lots of things are questionable if you don't actualy like it . GM food is safe ...the arguement used its not safe ...when it is. Accidents happen ... the technology is safe.

    http://www.uic.com.au/nip14.htm
     
  8. Polka Dots and Strip

    Polka Dots and Strip Member

    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nuclear power is probably the best way to cut back on greenhouse gas emissions, and the new generation of powerstations are safer simply because they are simpler so less can go wrong.

    Chernobyl was what happens when you try experiments without turning the reactor off, and considering the number of nuclear plants in the world there has been only one truley major incident.

    Nuclear power will save the world
     
  9. dhs

    dhs Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,304
    Likes Received:
    7
    considering the alternatives out there, I give it a thumbs down. just another way of the world using a cheap alternative today while fucking things up for down the road.
     
  10. kier

    kier I R Baboon

    Messages:
    1,907
    Likes Received:
    1
    try and answer the question, how do you get rid of nuclear power stations?
     
  11. Claire

    Claire Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,855
    Likes Received:
    22
    Look....

    By each home having solar energy, backed up with wind energy we dont need nuclear or resource burning energy.

    There is no argument here
     
  12. Spyder

    Spyder La dah de dah

    Messages:
    1,855
    Likes Received:
    2
    Bollocks, thats all i can say it might cut back on greenhouse gases, but it'll still cause generations if not thousands of years worth of radiation and damage to our seas and environment, not to mention us

    i think that answers everyone who thinks nuclear power is ok
     
  13. kier

    kier I R Baboon

    Messages:
    1,907
    Likes Received:
    1
    large scale, we could generate more than enough power for the uk with hydro farms off the north coast off of scotland


    but who has that kinda money? humph
     
  14. Claire

    Claire Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,855
    Likes Received:
    22
    Look at what we wasted on the war?... we HAVE that kinda money;)
     
  15. Claire

    Claire Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,855
    Likes Received:
    22
    Is it?

    I am a utilities engineering project manager, I am also a FoE campaigner.

    I see both sides to this Paddy, and I can assure you that it is very workable.

    Solar panels on each house would cover at least 50% of their energybills. It is not daft to predict that the rest could be taken from renewable sources.
     
  16. Spyder

    Spyder La dah de dah

    Messages:
    1,855
    Likes Received:
    2
    meng i never said that...hehe


    just clearing that up..

    We have the money, we have the area, we have the resources,

    renewable energy is the only way to go if we want constant energy, whilst keeping the environment safe, and not leaving a vast nuclear stock pile for future generations to deal with.

    simply burying nuclear waste doesnt not make the problem go away, it simply prolongs it
     
  17. adigaskell

    adigaskell Member

    Messages:
    154
    Likes Received:
    0
    We don't need the money to build them, that isn't the problem, but renewable energy (wind, wave) is about three times more expensive for the consumer than fossil fuels. Solar power is even more expensive.

    Given the fuss that people created over the rises in British Gas prices recently I'm not sure you'd get many signing up to use renewables.

    I do agree with the idea of solar panels on houses though. Maybe the government could use the rising house prices as bait to get house builders to install solar panels on every new house in the country. It would surely do alot more than having big and inefficient windmills scattered around.

    Something many people don't realise is that many offshore windfarms are located in major shipping lanes :rolleyes:

    I can't really see this government coming up with any kind of decent solution to this and we'll muddle though as usual
     
  18. bokonon

    bokonon Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,554
    Likes Received:
    3
    I don't think that's quite the perfect way to get rid of a nuclear power station. Dismantling sounds like quite a tall order never mind then transporting the stuff god knows how far. And disposing of uranium of whathaveyou "like any other nuclear waste" is obviously pretty dangerous. It must be considering we still haven't found any safe way to do this.

    If we have like, do tell. But dismantle and bury surely can't be the answer!

    Personally I think there must be some other answer, I don't know it :rolleyes:, but there has to be a truly safe way to create lots of energy. A friend of mine has a marvellous plan, but I don't know where he's at with it all and I actually feel like I shouldn't tell anyone :D

    One thing which gets me though is when people petition the banning of wind farms but will also complain about living near a nuclear station or on it's dumping route. A sad fact remains I think that this country will never run on natural power sources, we just don't want to see it.
     
  19. adigaskell

    adigaskell Member

    Messages:
    154
    Likes Received:
    0
    No one's mentioned biofuel yet. Any opinions on that?
     
  20. matthew

    matthew Almost sexy

    Messages:
    9,292
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think that would be a good idea..apart from the fact that people would do a good trade in pinching them (solar panels)...insurance premiums would go up...and if it did not fully meet your needs..a tax would surely come into effect to cover 'extra' power you recieved...plus what about the infrastructure that is around at the moment...how would that be dismantled...is this idea only for us in the UK or is this a global solution ????

    I did read an article today that bothered me...

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/nuclear/article/0,2763,1293988,00.html

    But still..i can't deny its not changed my mind...
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice