May the fission be with you

[TyrantOfFlames]

So, what is everyone's stance on nuclear power? I know in America, it is a big issue of debate. The stalemate keeps any change from occuring in the world of nuclear power. I am curious to hear what all of you think of the pros and cons of it, and even speculation on fusion.

 

[S4R]

My main issue with nuclear power is obviously the waste. This fact alone makes me think we should put more money into solar and wind research, if we can better learn to store energy with these two sources I think we will be heading in a healthier direction.


Actually, I think I'll just go home today after class and invent cold fusion.

 

[TyrantOfFlames]

I agree with you there, but a way around the waste problem would be the breeder reactors, if only Carter hadn't outlawed them (the bastard). Compared to the waste from fossil fuel reactors, it is negligible, (except for the fact that it's radioactive, heh). Alot of people around here have alot of misconceptions and problems with nuclear power, i was just wondering if any of you had an opinion.

While you're at it, S4R, try to find a superconductor; we could use one of those too.

 

[Russell]

We have superconductors Loads of them! But I think the waste is a problem.And is damn hard to expose of..... But when they can work out how to use fusion well, then it will easily be the best source of power.....

 

[TyrantOfFlames]

Originally posted by godisanatheist
We have superconductors Loads of them! But I think the waste is a problem.And is damn hard to expose of..... But when they can work out how to use fusion well, then it will easily be the best source of power.....

Since when?? Show me where you heard this from. As far as I know they have no superconductors, and the only thing they thought might possibly work is hydrogen metal, which they haven't been able to get ahold of.

In case you weren't aware, a superconductor is a metal that can hold an electric charge with 0 ohms. That means no resistance: no heat leakage. This would mean much higher power conservation, if they became widely used. They would also be able to store vast amounts of energy for an indefinite amount of time. I think it would be all over the media if they had one.

 

[_Transparent_]

i hate to go against the flow but i quite like nuclear power, i know the down sides and don't get me wrong, if we could have solar, wind etc power for everything id love it. its just not practical at the moment, and anyway we will probably all die soon due to a war or something, so it wont effect anyone. but i think that everyone here should be helpping for natural resources of power, and it starrts with turning off your PC and TV, and everything else eletrical in your house, that includes lights right.

 

[TyrantOfFlames]

Whoops...looks like i misconstrued my point. I only agree with S4R in that the nuclear waste is a bit of a problem. I still think nuclear is the way to go. It is by far the most efficient, and yes, right now, wind and solar are very impractical. To have a practical source of solar power, we need a collector that can't be blocked by the atmosphere. But then how would the power get back to earth? If they can be made practical, then great, but I have doubts.

As for the people worried about the Chernoble and Three Mile Island incidents...those are cases that will likely never happen again, (unless a plant crew becomes that stupid again).

 

[Useful Idiot]

su·per·con·duc·tiv·i·ty (spr-kndk-tv-t)
n.
The flow of electric current without resistance in certain metals, alloys, and ceramics at temperatures near absolute zero, and in some cases at temperatures hundreds of degrees above absolute zero.

 

[TyrantOfFlames]

Originally posted by Useful Idiot
su·per·con·duc·tiv·i·ty (spr-kndk-tv-t)
n.
The flow of electric current without resistance in certain metals, alloys, and ceramics at temperatures near absolute zero, and in some cases at temperatures hundreds of degrees above absolute zero.

D'oh! <smacks head> stupid stupid stupid! I forgot about the near absolute zero stuff. That doesn't really count; it's so insanely impractical that there are very few uses for it indeed. I mean room temperature stuff.

Good call, Useful Idiot.

 

[S4R]

Originally posted by TyrantOfFlames
Whoops...looks like i misconstrued my point. I only agree with S4R in that the nuclear waste is a bit of a problem. I still think nuclear is the way to go.

As do I. I simply think we need to place more effort in research for alternative energy sources. But, as it stands now nuclear is the way to go, but we need something better in the near future.

 

[Russell]

Originally posted by TyrantOfFlames
Since when?? Show me where you heard this from. As far as I know they have no superconductors, and the only thing they thought might possibly work is hydrogen metal, which they haven't been able to get ahold of.

In case you weren't aware, a superconductor is a metal that can hold an electric charge with 0 ohms. That means no resistance: no heat leakage. This would mean much higher power conservation, if they became widely used. They would also be able to store vast amounts of energy for an indefinite amount of time. I think it would be all over the media if they had one.

No, you just cool a gas to close to absolute zero and it has super conductive powers.... I read it in a university physics book. U want me to ask my physics teacher on monday and then I can giveyouan answer? Oh just read urtlater stuff Ooops, heh h=yeah it is hugely impractical...