AP McCain calls for building 45 new nuclear reactors

[Cobol74]

Right:

1. UK has as much, if not more issues than the US with waste from nuclear power plants. No one wants one near them, one phrase I heard was "If they are so safe lets build one next to the houses of parliament, then people would have some confidence".

2. The "powers that be" shot themselves in the foot by saying "they are perfectly safe" before 3 mile Island, Windscale and Chernobyl incidents, now no one believes them.

3. If they are so safe why can you not get liability insurance on one - the insurance industry wants no part of them because they are not perfectly safe, in a complex industrial plant nothing is 100% safe, ever.

4. The UK is facing a 15 Billion (GBP) de-commissioning cost which was not factored into the cost of the electricity when sold so will need to be found from current resources

5. The Shah was the initiator of the atomic programme in IRAN, the present regime just continued what they were doing, personally I have no issue with them having a bomb unless they signed the non proliferation treaty of course, not sure if they did. Look at the map, Pakistan, India and Israel all have one I'd be a bit worried if I was Iranian.



Sorry no solutions just some things to think about.

/EDIT Oh one thing Severn Barrier I am all in favour.

[Firecat]

Yes, Iran has signed the NNPT

[Cobol74]

Well they lied then.

[Hidden_Hunter]

We should of built nuclear here and built it twenty years ago, we have huge tracts of uranium and storage of waste wouldn't really be an issue. We can always build the reactors on Tasmania, not like anyone likes them anyway

[efoolution]

Originally Posted by jetsetter

[...] but unfortunately ignorance is widespread.

I was 9 when Chernobyl happend and I still remember how it was back then living close to 1000 Miles away from it (so not "next door" really). How our Food was poisend and whole harvests of middle Europe got just thrown away, how I wasn´t allowed to play outside for weeks due to fear of contermination ... not to mention how the People closer to it had to suffer ...

I am not a anti-nuclear-energy moron. I know about safety of new reactors, I know about the stupidiy that lead to chernobyl. I don´t generally oppose nuclear power. But, with all due respect ... I don´t think you should call it ignorant if someone is concerned about nuclear power. If it goes wrong, it goes wrong badly. That is something you should be aware of, if Chernobyl had been on your continent, you surely wouldn´t talk of igrnorance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

[Posmo]

Originally Posted by Viper007Bond

Of course nuclear isn't perfect, but at least we can control the waste rather than it going into the atmosphere.

Yeah, just stick it at the back of cupboard and forget about it. The cupboard being a hugely deep, drilled hole to the ground.

[Firecat]

Originally Posted by Cobol74

Well they lied then.

Prove it.

[smib]

The company I work for (Areva) is apparently pushing to get waste reprocessing going in the U.S. I really hope this starts happening, I want nuclear power to be more widespread here, that way we don't have to worry about electric cars adding to fossil fuel consumption. Also so my electric bill can go down.

[Cobol74]

Originally Posted by Firecat

Prove it.

Quite difficult, but everyone in the US administration and in Israel is mighty concerned that IRAN is developing an atomic weapon, now if you sign a treaty saying that you won't and then you do you are lying in my book.

Not the first time Politicians lie, not the last, and not exclusive an Iranian trait either (Smiley Tony "weapons of mass destruction" Blair please stand up).

[Firecat]

Originally Posted by Cobol74

Quite difficult, but everyone in the US administration and in Israel is mighty concerned that IRAN is developing an atomic weapon, now if you sign a treaty saying that you won't and then you do you are lying in my book.

Not the first time Politicians lie, not the last, and not exclusive an Iranian trait either (Smiley Tony "weapons of mass destruction" Blair please stand up).

The U.S.A and Israel? Sorry, can't take their word for it. Regardless, the NNPT allows nations to develop Nuclear energy. So Iran is allowed to have such a program. Whether they are trying to build a weapon is still speculation. Even if they were, they aren't suicidal.

And of course Israel, which hasn't signed the NNPT, has nuclear weapons and I blame the U.S. and Brits for that, so much for non-proliferation.

[Buba]

Can't be bothered to read all the - no questions asked - fabulous shit you guys posted after Germany won in the best game ever against Portugal (not a fan, but still, awesome!)

Fucking German green Party wants to shut down all nuclear reactors (big deal, no other country in the EU wants to do that...) but also wants to restrict emissions. WTF? All Power Plants do like 8 times more emissions than all our 60 Mill cars combined... Crazy Fuckers... Get a grip! Lets do nuclear for another 40-50 years until we find out cars are not the problem and the fusion reactor will heal us all...

[jetsetter]

But, with all due respect ... I don´t think you should call it ignorant if someone is concerned about nuclear power.

Coal kills and has killed many more people than nuclear ever has.

Coal also contains low levels of uranium, thorium, and other naturally-occurring radioactive isotopes whose release into the environment leads to radioactive contamination. While these substances are present as very small trace impurities, enough coal is burned that significant amounts of these substances are released. A 1,000 MW coal-burning power plant could release as much as 5.2 tons/year of uranium (containing 74 pounds of uranium-235) and 12.8 tons/year of thorium. The radioactive emission from this coal power plant is 100 times greater than a comparable nuclear power plant with the same electrical output; including processing output, the coal power plant's radiation output is over 3 times greater.

[Cobol74]

Originally Posted by Firecat

The U.S.A and Israel? Sorry, can't take their word for it. Regardless, the NNPT allows nations to develop Nuclear energy. So Iran is allowed to have such a program. Whether they are trying to build a weapon is still speculation. Even if they were, they aren't suicidal.

And of course Israel, which hasn't signed the NNPT, has nuclear weapons and I blame the U.S. and Brits for that, so much for non-proliferation.

OK do I think that they have an atomic programme to do with weapons - yes I do, do I blame them, no I don't, do I think that the Shah lied when he signed the non proliferation treaty, yes I do. There you go.

[nist7]

Originally Posted by Blind_Io

I'm tired so I have not read the whole thread. The biggest problem is with how the US disposes of radioactive waste. We really need to build centrifuges to spin the waste down into fuel so we can really extract every bit of energy from it. As long as that is part of the plan, I'm all for it.

As Spectre said, USA is the only country that has a problem with radioactive waste because of some stupid law that prevents us from reprocessing used fuel to be recycled again and again. I think the big concern is that terrorists may break into the reprocessing plants and steal the spent nuclear fuel to use in a dirty bomb.

As long as we make nuclear reprocessing and power plants as secure as Area 51...where the guards are allowed immediate and lethal force to take care of any trespassers, I can't see that big of an issue with recycling spent fuel.

[Crazyjeeper]

Originally Posted by nist7

As Spectre said, USA is the only country that has a problem with radioactive waste because of some stupid law that prevents us from reprocessing used fuel to be recycled again and again. I think the big concern is that terrorists may break into the reprocessing plants and steal the spent nuclear fuel to use in a dirty bomb.

As long as we make nuclear reprocessing and power plants as secure as Area 51...where the guards are allowed immediate and lethal force to take care of any trespassers, I can't see that big of an issue with recycling spent fuel.

If that is the concern that is stopping us from reprocessing rods, then the terrorists have won.

[thedguy]

Originally Posted by nist7

I think the big concern is that terrorists may break into the reprocessing plants and steal the spent nuclear fuel to use in a dirty bomb.

That was never a worry. The law was put into place to somehow discourage the production of plutonium.

[Spectre]

Originally Posted by thedguy

That was never a worry. The law was put into place to somehow discourage the production of plutonium.

Correct, the law has nothing to do with terrorist concerns at all; nuclear plants are better guarded than some military facilities and if you penetrate the grounds, you get shot, no questions asked.

[Cobol74]

Too f*****g right mate, you have no business there what so ever - bang! I am all for that.