NationStates Jolt Archive

Should we (mankind) be expanding our nuclear power capacity or not? Why or why not?

I think we should. We need to develop more alternative to oil and gas. Nuclear energy, aside of reneable energies and coal is an alternative energy form which needs to be used for the energy security of the world.

I think we will untimatley destroy ourselves this way but I don't think the nuclear powers will give up their programs simply because of that. Here is a movie that I believe will put a bit of a human touch on this with a humourous side: http://www.ebaumsworld.com/endofworld.html. Warning there is language that some may find offensive. You have been warned.

I voted yes. Personally I prefer renewable sources but until we come up with better solutions then there currently are we have to depend on some other sources.

Fossil fuel power plants are polluting … dirty … and in all actuality put off more radiation (in the form of radon) into the local environment then all the nuclear plants in the us put together.

Nuclear disposal … right now we have only a temporary solution. But

I hate to sound like I am quoting superman but really soon as we develop orbital lifting capability that does not cost 1k a pound we really can dispose of it rather easy … not really polluting when the sun will break it down to its individual atoms and use it lol

I think we will untimatley destroy ourselves this way but I don't think the nuclear powers will give up their programs simply because of that. Here is a movie that I believe will put a bit of a human touch on this with a humourous side: http://www.ebaumsworld.com/endofworld.html. Warning there is language that some may find offensive. You have been warned.


Um can you read, nuclear power is different then nuclear weapons

Um can you read, nuclear power is different then nuclear weapons



I wasn't talking to you, was I?

Yes, but...

1) With responsible safeguards in place to ensure the least possible radiological impact on people and the environment.

2) Ensuring the highest possible appropriate levels of competent security on all materials and facilities which could present an opportunity to less high-minded individuals and groups.

3) With harsh penalties for violations of safety and security regulations and protocols to include life in prison for those found guilty of any infraction which could have created an incident.

4) Allowing open referendums by the population to approve or deny permission to contstruct a nuclear plant, use power generated from nuclear plants, and shut down plants.

5) Requiring all plants be contsantly maintained with the highest levels of safeguards that current technologies allow, and ensuring that older plants are properly retrofitted or decomissioned.

6) Permanently banning massed transportation of nuclear materials through population centers, and ensuring proper waste storage facilities.

7) Providing emergency response gear and training that is more than adaquate for communities near nuclear power plants.

8) Requiring constant monitoring by FEMA and other appropriate agencies as well as oversight by public agencies.

Failing the acceptance and adoption of these regulations by the energy-generation sector of the economy, further expansion of nuclear power ought to be disallowed, and existing plants safely and appropriately shut down and entombed.

Tremendous powers require tremendous responsibilities.

I wasn't talking to you, was I?
Nope just pointing out that you answered a question that was never posed

The question was asked about nuclear power

You replied with an “Armageddon” reply about nuclear powers holding their weapons

Doesn’t quite fit the question

Was just pointing it out just incase you didn’t know you answered the wrong question.

(oh and if you wernt talking to me ... a general thread poster who were you talking to?)

Tremendous powers require tremendous responsibilities.

Hear Hear!

I voted Yes, but only if the restriction mentioned above (by Tyrrian Avalon) are put in place.

Should we (mankind) be expanding our nuclear power capacity or not? Why or why not?
Nuclear energy is safe, clean and cheap. We have an abundant supply of uranium and fossil fuels are choking our environment. Hydro electric power is the cheapest but not the most readily available. Windmills are a joke IMHO.

Solar power needs to be investigated more and load shifting of peak power, through use of "time of use" metering.

But a solid yes to "nuke" plants that are constructed properly.

As an advocate of nuclear energy (the Oak Ridge Y-12 plant was where my father worked for many years - nuclear energy and weapons paid for my baby formula and what not... and is often a joking explanation any eccenticities I might have) it does me good to see such an overwhelming positive response. :D

As an advocate of nuclear energy (the Oak Ridge Y-12 plant was where my father worked for many years - nuclear energy and weapons paid for my baby formula and what not... and is often a joking explanation any eccenticities I might have) it does me good to see such an overwhelming positive response.
Well: and you are staying in a country that is using a lot of nuclear energy - like many others. Of course - only for peaceful purposes. Only, foreverer except if one neighbour keeps its nukes. Then all options remain on the table to reestablish regional stability and a new "balance of power" which may include the nuclear field.

If done responsibly, using the safer and scalable Pebble Bed Reactor models, then I would say definately that expansion is a good thing. It's cheap, scalable, safe, and robust. It would give us a method of reducing the much more polluting Coal and Oil plants and be capable of supplying the power needed to make the eventual transition to full solar/wind/fusion/heat exchange/hydrogen/etc.

Of course, if you are talking about building a bunch of Chernobyls, then no, I would prefer not to glow tomorrow.

Should we (mankind) be expanding our nuclear power capacity or not? Why or why not?
We need nuclear energy to bridge the gap to renewable resources, like hydrogen.

Once we are there, we slowly increase use of hydrogen while decreasing nuclear, because I am still worried about the chance of a meltdown.

Yes in the short-term, until a long-term solution (Reliable fusion power, renewable energy etc.) can be found.

I wasn't sure whether to put yes or other, because the question was a little vague, but basically we've got an energy crisis in the UK, because all our power stations are well past their design life, and sometime soon we're going to need something to replace them. Renewable technology just isn't advanced enough to meet our needs quickly enough, so we must reluctantly go for more nuclear stations (despite the fact BNFL is repeatedly bailed out financially by the government).