| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 68471 | 2006-04-30 00:56:00 | Nuclear power. | Cicero (40) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 450675 | 2006-04-30 07:57:00 | In fact I read about the pros and the cons too, don't kid yourself that all is roses with nuclear power, far from it, But at the end of the day, unless the worlds population is drastically reduced, pollution from non-nuclear sources is more likely to produce greater problems than nuclear power generation. I have read the articles. Read a lot of others too, pro and con. I make my own mind up. It may be safe in that there haven't been too many disasters yet. Doesn't mean never. The problem is its a BIG HUGE LONG TERM disaster when there is one. And yes, the worlds ever increasing population of humans is the whole problem. Of everything. Overcrowding, loss of species, rainforests, unemployment, etc etc. It all comes down to too may people filling more and more space. Sterilize more. License people to have kids, too many of us shouldn't anyway. Take drastic action, because as individuals no-one will, they all think its someone elses problem. How many here have more than 2 kids and why did you? |
pctek (84) | ||
| 450676 | 2006-04-30 07:58:00 | Not a abstract art lad,I am more Canaletto,so can't help. | Cicero (40) | ||
| 450677 | 2006-04-30 07:59:00 | Yes Somebody - Northland would seem to be the best site but what happens when the NIMBY's start objecting. | Dally (6292) | ||
| 450678 | 2006-04-30 08:49:00 | What parts did I get wrong? Its too small, Got a bigger version by any chance? |
Metla (12) | ||
| 450679 | 2006-04-30 09:08:00 | Perhaps it is a case of not that we should have a Nuclear Station , rather, can we afford to buy one? PJ | Poppa John (284) | ||
| 450680 | 2006-04-30 09:17:00 | Dunno what the problem is in this country? It was built for Hydropower and every Dam ever built here has improved the environment. :thumbs: |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 450681 | 2006-04-30 09:29:00 | Dunno what the problem is in this country? It was built for Hydropower and every Dam ever built here has improved the environment. :thumbs: So lets build more, wherever the rain falls the most. Rain patterns seem to have shifted, so why not find new places to put dams. Incidentally, re-invent the old Ministry of Works to build them. None of theirs have failed yet. PJ |
Poppa John (284) | ||
| 450682 | 2006-04-30 09:49:00 | Dunno what the problem is in this country? It was built for Hydropower and every Dam ever built here has improved the environment. :thumbs: The RMA is what is wrong.Oh and slugs,you might knock a few off if you build a dam. |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 450683 | 2006-04-30 11:18:00 | Yes Somebody - Northland would seem to be the best site but what happens when the NIMBY's start objecting. Well we're never going to make everyone happy: Build nuclear: NO NO NO say the Greenies Build hydro: Farmers don't like it - Project Aqua Build wind: People complain "it doesn't look good" - Eg. Manawatu Build coal: Polluting Build gas/LPG/diesel: Too much pollution, going to run out soon Build solar: Too expensive and inefficient Shut down Comalco: Don't know why, but people also oppose doing that Build new transmission lines to get the power we are ALREADY generating, or future capacity to Auckland: people complain about that too. So it's inevitible that something has to be done. Nuclear is the lesser of all the evils, offering the most postive aspects - compensate the people living in the area sufficiently, and just get on with it. People oppose the building of prisons in their areas, yet they still happen. |
somebody (208) | ||
| 450684 | 2006-04-30 11:27:00 | So lets build more, wherever the rain falls the most. Rain patterns seem to have shifted, so why not find new places to put dams. Incidentally, re-invent the old Ministry of Works to build them. None of theirs have failed yet. PJ Government subsidising the cost of electricity is part of the reason we are in the situation we have now. In the 1980's when the government decided to build lots of power stations using taxpayer's money, it meant that the taxpayer was effectively subsidising the cost of electricity for the power users. Now you might say that taxpayers = electricity users: Look at Comalco, Australian company - Uses 30% of NZ's electricity (uses nearly all of the power coming out of the Manapouri hydro station) paying a fraction of the cost we pay for electricity - and why do they come to NZ? Because WE as taxpayers are artificially driving the power prices down, such that they can afford to ship tonnes of aluminium precursor over from Australia to process. I remember reading in the newspaper that they pay 1/1000th the cost per-unit of electricity compared to the average household, yet they only generate $300mill or so in revenue p/a, and employ about 25 people. This artificial lowering of prices meant that electricity was relatively cheap for the 20 years or so - meaning that NZers waste electricity. We don't have sufficiently insulated homes (like Western Europe has), we leave lights on when we shouldn't, and have inefficient electric heaters burning for hours on end. We have never had the education to conserve power - and while there is definetely need to address this issue, it will never compensate for the increasing growth in population and economy. Let's not repeat this cycle of building hydro stations at taxpayers expense, only to do it again in 20 years time and fuel this cycle of energy wastage. Build a nuclear power station at cost to the power companies, with far too much capacity, such that it will last significantly longer and be able to cope with future population increases. That way, the cost will be passed onto the users of the power, encouraging power savings. |
somebody (208) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 | |||||