Should the US build Nuclear power plants

[Rush Limbaugh]

So what do you think? Should we build more nuclear power plants? Or should we focus harder on energy conservation and developing solar, wind and geothermal technologies instead?

[Farnan]

Absoluinglutely, nuclear powerplants burn clean, are more efficent than oil, and can help reduce our dependence on oil. We may have to import uranium, but I trust Australia more than the Mideast and Russia.

[Rush Limbaugh]

Australia is turning to hemp

[Farnan]

I mean that we get our Uranium from Australia...

Anyways it works for France who has the cheapest energy in Europe, it should also, in this case, work for the US. We have a huge amount of rivers and lakes to provide cooling water, the know-how, and the money to do it. Ironically it is environmentalist who don't want us to use this power, which emits no CO2...

[Exarch]

I mean that we get our Uranium from Australia...

Anyways it works for France who has the cheapest energy in Europe, it should also, in this case, work for the US. We have a huge amount of rivers and lakes to provide cooling water, the know-how, and the money to do it. Ironically it is environmentalist who don't want us to use this power, which emits no CO2...

i got no problem with nucleah powah, since they emit water vapour and radioactive waste, which i suppose we could drop into the core of the earth...but i should also point out, farnan, that using natural lakes/water to cool your power plant and then dumping the superwarm water back into the lake/river is going to kill a lot of fish because of the temperature change.

btw for those who spout 'chenobyl'; chenobyl was shoddily run with soviet style safety measures; i more safety measures would be the order of the day with modern nuclear power

and i have no problem with oz supplying america with uranium...so long as they dont treat us like saudi arabia.

[Farnan]

i got no problem with nucleah powah, since they emit water vapour and radioactive waste, which i suppose we could drop into the core of the earth...but i should also point out, farnan, that using natural lakes/water to cool your power plant and then dumping the superwarm water back into the lake/river is going to kill a lot of fish because of the temperature change..

No, but we can use that to to supply the water supply for the core cooling, and then we can re-use that same supply for a good time and then if it is safe return it after cooling the water.

[the_mango55]

yes, we definitely should.

[Rush Limbaugh]

Would you believe here on Long Island they built one and then never put it online and we have the highest electricity bills in the US? And they installed the core and its just sitting there.

[Sebdeas]

Well it's clean but what are you going to do with the waste?
I'm not against nuclear power but it should be used with caution, a lot of caution.

[Chlodwig I.]

Building Powerplants that depend on fossile fuels?

I would rather try geothermic or solarpower
you don't depend on other countrys for the fuel

and in fact the prices are cheaper in comparison to nuclear power (if you take in consideration the prices for the final-storage of the nuclear-waste)

[Axeman]

No. It is a non-renewable resource and according to the best estimates we have 100-200 years of Uranium to use. No point building power plants that will just become useless later on and find ourselves in the same predicament then as we are now.

[MadBurgerMaker]

Yes.

[Senno]

Yes. They have more uses than just power as seen down in the Science thread.

It would be part of a solution towards energy, not the whole thing, just part. Saying "no" to everything has brought us to this point. We need to say "yes" to something while we search for alternative energy sources for the future.

And liberals claim Conservatives represent the status quo. Forest for the trees.

I foresee Rush as Johnny Appleseed, spreading his seed everywhere.

[Gary88]

its someway towards a solution but there are so many issues with it, aside from the waste you have the fact that even transporting the material to and from the site contaminates the surrounding area, just look at the irish chanel.

[Pontifex Maximus]

I would say a healthy combination of both would be good, after all, it does burn clean. I think that energy obtained from something as simple as the wind is a better way to go, but we can't let our energy levels be determined by the breeze. If we have a few non kite flying days I don't the electiricty to go off as I'm putting the finishing touches on my term paper.

Geothermal energy is great because it only emits about 2% of what fossil fuel bruning plants do. In addition it is one of the most cost effective means of energy according to the EPA. (Then again the EPA does come up with some pretty stupid ideas..) I would like to see more of these plants spring up in the US, but unfortunately I think we only have less than 60 in four states...

[captainbloodloss]

With solar power technology we possess now it would take around 160 million square miles of solar panels (The cheap kind, the kind that powers your lawn lights) to power the entire US. That includes all energy consumption: cars, homes, etc. Obviously that is not feasible.

Another kind of solar energy is heat energy. This is much more efficient as heat is much easier to capture. Unlike photovoltaic cells, they do not discriminate between different wavelengths of radiation. A mirror reflects all heat and light.

Wind is much too finicky for general use and geothermal energy only works for places like Iceland where the person to geothermic land ratio is very low.

That leaves nuclear (for now).

One possiblity I have been pondering for quite some time is harnessing the bioelectricity (or starches) of photosynthetic algae instead of PV cells. Cellular respiration and glycolysis are far more efficient than any technology we possess, and cheaper too. Certain bacteria produce large quantities of heat also, another way to heat water into steam and turn turbines.

[Last Roman]

unfortunately, as the captain above me pointed out, solar panels are horribly inefficient and space-consuming. Same thing with wind-made energy

I've heard something about this algae idea, but I hardly know anything about it
sounds like an interesting idea though

[Senno]

Here's our governments positions on the waste issue.

Environmentalists have blocked plans to store waste deep in a hole in Nevada for years at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Yucca Mtn. is akin to being way way out in the outback of Australia. Desert, deserted. It's about 6 hours by car from me, and 2-3 hours from Reno, NV as far as I recall. The little town of Yucca is close enough to support operations.

The problem is environmentalists have blocked virtually everything for 20 years. And we can't do that anymore. We need to start having solutions.

Our nuclear safety record is great. The worst (only?) incident was Three Mile Island.

We don't propose to kill all the fish in streams, but we do need some energy short-term while we look for other alternatives.

This makes sense until we start seeding hemp everywhere.

[Rush Limbaugh]

Reporting for duty

[Iscariott]

Here's our governments positions on the waste issue.

Environmentalists have blocked plans to store waste deep in a hole in Nevada for years at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Yucca Mtn. is akin to being way way out in the outback of Australia. Desert, deserted. It's about 6 hours by car from me, and 2-3 hours from Reno, NV as far as I recall. The little town of Yucca is close enough to support operations.

The problem is environmentalists have blocked virtually everything for 20 years. And we can't do that anymore. We need to start having solutions.

Our nuclear safety record is great. The worst (only?) incident was Three Mile Island.

We don't propose to kill all the fish in streams, but we do need some energy short-term while we look for other alternatives.

This makes sense until we start seeding hemp everywhere.

The main argument against the yukka mtn plan is the danger of transporting nuclear waste anywhere en masse. I don't have a deep seeded hatred of nuclear power, my state until recently has had a plant. I even support the building of a *few* new plants to help ease the energy strain.

Until a better plan than sticking the waste in a hole as far away as we can emerges, I firmly believe this type of energy has to be treated with enormous caution.