| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 80061 | 2007-06-10 04:40:00 | Nuclear Power | Twelvevolts (5457) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 557855 | 2007-06-11 02:19:00 | If you believe everything you see on that show, you must be either very young or naive. Are you sure you are a real NZer, as I can smell the plutonium on your breath. What we need is something that is renewable, such as wind and hydro. Nuclear creates a waste product which pollutes the earth. 'Out of Sight, Out of mind' doesn't actually get rid of the waste. I don't understand why we don't build more hydro. It is the NIMBYs that are the problem, and can you see anywhere in NZ that would actually consent to a nucleur powerplant. A leak at a nucleur power plant in NZ would also affect the entire country, and is a huge target for terrorists. Renewable does not mean clean. Wood is a renewable resource but nobody is suggesting using is for power generation. Hydro power is more often than not extremely ecologically damaging. Wind is better but takes a lot of space and generates quite a lot of noise. If we could safely and economically dispose of the waste products then nuclear power would be far more environmentally friendly than hydro power and less invasive than wind turbines. Unfortunately in New Zealand we do not have enough demand to fund an economically viable nuclear power industry with proper disposal systems and safety measures. I have no problems with nuclear power in theory, but in NZ it is not yet a viable option. |
TGoddard (7263) | ||
| 557856 | 2007-06-11 02:27:00 | I don't understand why we don't build more hydro. It is the NIMBYs that are the problem, and can you see anywhere in NZ that would actually consent to a nucleur powerplant. A leak at a nucleur power plant in NZ would also affect the entire country, and is a huge target for terrorists. I think renewable is a great idea - line the ranges with wind turbines. I'm even willing for them to put one in my back yard (literally). I would also personally not have any problem with a nuclear power station being build in my back yard (which isn't big enough... but if it was...). The issue with hydro is that there isn't really anywhere that a large-scale station can be built, without huge public outcry. Project Aqua faced huge opposition, and all the other major rivers have already been dammed where possible. In any case, lets put things into perspective. You're taking the worst-case sceniaro approach. IF a leak were to happen, then it would have a huge impact. But, the chances of that happening with modern technology are virtually nil. Same with the terrorist threat issue - maybe in the USA, but not here. I could jump up and down and say that hydro is dangerous, because if the dam were to collapse, then it would flood tens of thousands of people downstream. Do I think NZ will go nuclear anytime soon? No (resource consent, legal /political issues etc.). But *should* we go nuclear? Yes. |
somebody (208) | ||
| 557857 | 2007-06-11 06:47:00 | If you believe everything you see on that show, you must be either very young or naive. Are you sure you are a real NZer, as I can smell the plutonium on your breath. What we need is something that is renewable, such as wind and hydro. Nuclear creates a waste product which pollutes the earth. 'Out of Sight, Out of mind' doesn't actually get rid of the waste. I don't understand why we don't build more hydro. It is the NIMBYs that are the problem, and can you see anywhere in NZ that would actually consent to a nucleur powerplant. A leak at a nucleur power plant in NZ would also affect the entire country, and is a huge target for terrorists. First of all how could you smell plutonium? Just a question. robbyp try to learn about how to spell "naive". Try also with nucleur. I guess you also want cheap as well. NIMBY = Not In My Back Yard. So I take it that YOU personally have a wind farm or hydro generator? |
Sweep (90) | ||
| 557858 | 2007-06-11 08:23:00 | The day nuclear waste is 100% reuseable in New Zealand AND nuclear reactors are 100% safe, then I will vote to go nuclear. Till then, you can take your stick of plutonium and sit on it Nuclear creates a waste product which pollutes the earth. 'Out of Sight, Out of mind' doesn't actually get rid of the waste.Agree 100% :thumbs: Too many people are into the NIMBY bs... |
Myth (110) | ||
| 557859 | 2007-06-11 08:48:00 | I'm a fan of nuclear power but I accept that we'd have to have two reactors - one on standby for when the other is offline. As for getting a reactor, I understand you can buy them "off-the-shelf" from China and Russia. No problem. As for the high generation problems of nuclear reactors, nuc submarines use small reactors. In fact there are a whole heap of reactors just looking for a job sitting up in Murmansk. :D |
Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 557860 | 2007-06-11 08:54:00 | I'm a fan of nuclear power but I accept that we'd have to have two reactors - one on standby for when the other is offline. As for getting a reactor, I understand you can buy them "off-the-shelf" from China and Russia. No problem. As for the high generation problems of nuclear reactors, nuc submarines use small reactors. In fact there are a whole heap of reactors just looking for a job sitting up in Murmansk. :DI hear theres also 4 reactors sitting at Chernobyl that aren't being used |
Myth (110) | ||
| 557861 | 2007-06-11 09:43:00 | The UK as well as France has used Nuclear Power for Years without major problems, and compared to the UK NZ is grossly underpopulated. It is hard to build anything in Britain far from a centre of population - the Dungeness Nuclear Power Station is on the SE Coast in Sussex, hardly a sparsely populated area. It is logical to build Nuclear Plants near existing Power Distribution systems, to avoid the needless duplication of expensive assets. Somehow I don't think NZ's population is yet large enough to warrant the cost, but kiwis have been indoctrinated since 1984 about the Nuclear Bogeyman, and with the number of Luddites and tree huggers in NZ I can't see it happening even when it is the most logical source of energy. With diminishing stocks of hydro carbon fuels, mankind would be smart to start conserving them where possible for uses and application where there is no viable alternative on the horizon eg Petro-Chemicals, plastics, and lubricants - burning for electricity production would have to rate as one of the least efficient uses of hydro-carbon fuels |
KenESmith (6287) | ||
| 557862 | 2007-06-11 10:17:00 | Unfortunately in New Zealand we do not have enough demand to fund an economically viable nuclear power industry with proper disposal systems and safety measures. I have no problems with nuclear power in theory, but in NZ it is not yet a viable option.I also don't have a problem with nuclear power. There is no point in building a nuclear power station if it is uneconomical etc, but it is also ridiculous to discount any idea that has the word nuclear in it, whether it be power, ships or anything else. Maybe we should be a bit more creative though. I wonder how much it would cost to lay an undersea tunnel between New Zealand and Australia? They could supply us with electricity and we could supply them with water. :lol: |
maccrazy (6741) | ||
| 557863 | 2007-06-11 11:11:00 | I hear theres also 4 reactors sitting at Chernobyl that aren't being used And your point is? |
Twelvevolts (5457) | ||
| 557864 | 2007-06-11 11:32:00 | And your point is?Its not rocket science; figure it out | Myth (110) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 | |||||