Pages:
Author

Topic: Wha Do You Think About Nuclear Energy? (Read 1558 times)

hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 500
March 09, 2016, 05:04:58 AM
#37
I think that nuclear energy could be better for the environment than fossil fuels as long as there are strict regulations on nuclear power plants like in the US and unlike Japan.  I think it's a cleaner energy source.  However, solar and wind I think would be even better.

Idk many people say it's safer for the environment and I heard its good but I haven't read much into it
Did you really investigate how Nuclear power plant works?
Where and how is waste dumped, how much waste they have "produced over time"?
What happening with this waste over time and how can influence environment and on heath of humans.
How anyone can defend using of nuclear power after Fukushima disaster..
This was not incident this is nuclear holocaust, and victims will be known in future.
hero member
Activity: 1008
Merit: 510
March 08, 2016, 06:58:44 PM
#36
I think that nuclear energy could be better for the environment than fossil fuels as long as there are strict regulations on nuclear power plants like in the US and unlike Japan.  I think it's a cleaner energy source.  However, solar and wind I think would be even better.
full member
Activity: 175
Merit: 100
March 06, 2016, 07:31:29 PM
#35
Good if all people gonna use it but i think lower class people gonna catch up to that hardly.
jr. member
Activity: 58
Merit: 10
March 06, 2016, 06:14:51 PM
#34
Idk many people say it's safer for the environment and I heard its good but I haven't read much into it
newbie
Activity: 39
Merit: 0
March 06, 2016, 02:14:23 PM
#33
Please tell your opinions about nuclear energy, effection of environment, natural energy sources and fossil fuels.

Nuclear energy is a great source of energy, more than enough energy for our needs (that's what i think). BUT its effect to the environment is very huge and it's very hard to dispose those waste since those uranium will decay into leads i think. So nuclear energy is a bit shaky for a primary energy source. As for natural energy, these resources are limited and yet people squander these resource for no reason.
newbie
Activity: 11
Merit: 0
March 05, 2016, 07:07:21 AM
#32
I think its safer and modern technology
member
Activity: 67
Merit: 10
March 05, 2016, 05:35:17 AM
#31
But i'm not sure that nuclear power have no future, I think we need just find who improve this one  Wink
Probably have future but need more research and new technology.
Also safety and protection must be on first place not as before.
I'm agree with U, security is not enough important but it should be  Undecided
member
Activity: 119
Merit: 100
March 03, 2016, 03:33:37 PM
#30
But i'm not sure that nuclear power have no future, I think we need just find who improve this one  Wink
Probably have future but need more research and new technology.
Also safety and protection must be on first place not as before.
member
Activity: 67
Merit: 10
March 03, 2016, 01:49:03 PM
#29
But i'm not sure that nuclear power have no future, I think we need just find who improve this one  Wink
member
Activity: 67
Merit: 10
March 03, 2016, 01:42:37 PM
#28
I have nothing against nuclear plants. It's a cheap energy after all. Nuclear waste could be launched into space towards the sun, but it's too expensive for our politicians, who prefer to bury it for the time being hoping they won't live to see the consequences. Very smart of them.
launching missiles with contaminated contents?This is suicide!
Risking greatly, createing major ecological disaster if lanch faild, also those space travels are not cheap.
What to do with waste is real question, thets is why nuclear power have no future.
I'm okay with U it's not a good idea to launch into space towards the sun except if you want that the space becomes a waste ^^
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 500
March 02, 2016, 01:32:45 AM
#27
I have nothing against nuclear plants. It's a cheap energy after all. Nuclear waste could be launched into space towards the sun, but it's too expensive for our politicians, who prefer to bury it for the time being hoping they won't live to see the consequences. Very smart of them.
launching missiles with contaminated contents?This is suicide!
Risking greatly, createing major ecological disaster if lanch faild, also those space travels are not cheap.
What to do with waste is real question, thets is why nuclear power have no future.
legendary
Activity: 2478
Merit: 1360
Don't let others control your BTC -> self custody
March 01, 2016, 11:13:43 AM
#26
I have nothing against nuclear plants. It's a cheap energy after all. Nuclear waste could be launched into space towards the sun, but it's too expensive for our politicians, who prefer to bury it for the time being hoping they won't live to see the consequences. Very smart of them.
sr. member
Activity: 308
Merit: 251
March 01, 2016, 06:49:51 AM
#25
Its still safer than this


Its pretty dangerous to produce it. What I mean is I met people that produce it. health problems- you can not work more than 2-3 years with it otherwise you will have pretty bad problems with your health. And if not government supporting it would be completely non profitable to set it near highways

And I wont say about these all birds cases and so on Smiley
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 500
March 01, 2016, 05:50:16 AM
#24
"There are some drawbacks to thorium fuel cycles, but they are highly technical. For instance, thorium reactors have been criticized as potentially having more neutron leak compared with conventional reactors. More neutron leak means more shielding and other protection is needed for workers at the power plant"
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2015/01/16/thorium-future-nuclear-energy/#.VtVxw7QrLIU

"The advantages of thorium are purely theoretical, he told BBC News."
"The technology development is decades in the future. Instead I think we should focus on developing renewable technology - for example offshore wind technology - which I think has a huge potential to develop.”
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-24638816

After all there is no other super element that can be used instead of uranium.
I don't know why people don't realize there is great lobby, standing behind all this. Wink
member
Activity: 63
Merit: 10
March 01, 2016, 05:33:40 AM
#23
Is perfect for Electric Vehicles and cheap.
Give no CO2


Dont you think they take TOO much time to charge?
After all time is money
hero member
Activity: 1638
Merit: 756
Bobby Fischer was right
March 01, 2016, 05:27:08 AM
#22
The future belongs to fusion.
Advantages of nuclear fusion versus nuclear fission
Currently the generation of electricity in nuclear reactors is done by nuclear fission reactions. For the moment, nuclear fusion is not valid to generate electric power. Once developed, if nuclear fusion is really practicable, it will provide great advantages over nuclear fission:
 -Virtually inexhaustible sources of fuel.
 -No accidents in the reactor due to the chain reactions that occur in fissions.
 -The waste generated will be much less radioactive.
legendary
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1032
RIP Mommy
March 01, 2016, 05:24:12 AM
#21
It can be done safely, but we can't have nice things, so governments force reactors to be built on fault lines and in tsunami zones, or not at all.
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 500
March 01, 2016, 05:18:38 AM
#20
I think it's the best energy source available. It is pretty safe, and environmentally friendly. I think people are just paranoid of nuclear energy being unsafe.
How many craters will it take for you to realise that's a completely stupid statement to make?
Yes this can be done this way.
But at some moment we will have leakage when corrosion win this battle.


Or like this.



http://hubpages.com/politics/Dumping-of-Nuclear-Waste-In-the-Oceans
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
March 01, 2016, 05:07:44 AM
#19
I think it's the best energy source available. It is pretty safe, and environmentally friendly. I think people are just paranoid of nuclear energy being unsafe.

How many craters will it take for you to realise that's a completely stupid statement to make?
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 500
March 01, 2016, 04:20:16 AM
#18

The cost of waste recovery is just in energy price.
I don't know why people don't read how the is this bad for health?
Even if incident never occurs this still have problems with storing waste.
We still don't have such technology for safe use of  Nuclear energy!
Pages:
Jump to: