Sciencemadness Discussion Board
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1  
Author: Subject: Obama - Nuclear Power
MadHatter
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1034
Registered: 9-7-2004
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Member Is Offline

Mood: Patience growing thin !

[*] posted on 20-2-2010 at 20:28
Obama - Nuclear Power


I'm generally not in favor of President Obama's policies but he's stepped up despite his
own party's opposition to nuclear power for peace. This man should be applauded for his
efforts ! His goal is to reduce the obviously polluting coal-fired plants that dump toxins
into the air continually. I know that I'm going to get a lot of derision from the
anti-nuclear types. SO BE IT, AND THE HELL WITH YOU IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT !

MR. PRESIDENT, don't simply make it a home run - make it a GRAND SLAM ! :D:D:D:D

P.S. In case you haven't noticed I'M PRO NUCLEAR !

[Edited on 2010/2/21 by MadHatter]




Power comes from the barrel of a gun !
View user's profile View All Posts By User
IrC
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2710
Registered: 7-3-2005
Location: Eureka
Member Is Offline

Mood: Discovering

[*] posted on 20-2-2010 at 21:05


I agree screw em if they don't like nuke power. Problem is he closed the largest place to store waste the same day so really does he think this or was it just some talking point (just another politician full of it as usual) trying to gain support from some of the pro nuke people?

It is never what they say it's what they do that counts.




"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" Richard Feynman
View user's profile View All Posts By User
R0b0t1
Harmless
*




Posts: 26
Registered: 2-1-2010
Location: Sniping
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 20-2-2010 at 23:59


So... yeah. Were does the waste go again?

Orbit and beyond! Let's just hope the rocket doesn't blow up.




We've been doing so much with so little for so long, we can do everything with nothing in no time at all.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
chief
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 630
Registered: 19-7-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 04:01


Nuclear power for the USA: Right, since invading Iran for Oil is no option after the Russians and Chinese have issued their warnings ... :D
==> Also the petro-dollar ist nearly history: In the past, just by the coupling of Oiltrade and the US-currency, there was always enough Oil for the country ... but these days are gone ...
==> The first one who opposed against the petro$ was Saddam Hussein: He was going to trade Oil in other currencies ... .. _that_ was the reason for the 2 gulf-wars ..
==> Now Iran did the same, other countries are following ...

So yes: For the Americans it might be nuclear- and coal- time soon ...

[Edited on 21-2-2010 by chief]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
bquirky
National Hazard
****




Posts: 316
Registered: 22-10-2008
Location: Perth Western Australia
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 04:24


I love attoms !
View user's profile View All Posts By User
hissingnoise
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3920
Registered: 26-12-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: Pulverulescent!

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 04:58


But is it mutual?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
bquirky
National Hazard
****




Posts: 316
Registered: 22-10-2008
Location: Perth Western Australia
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 06:05


it must be ... they keep bumping into me.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
entropy51
Gone, but not forgotten
*****




Posts: 1612
Registered: 30-5-2009
Member Is Offline

Mood: Fissile

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 08:27


Quote: Originally posted by R0b0t1  
So... yeah. Were does the waste go again?
Same place as it's gone for the past 50 years here

Of course, there is always good old coal
View user's profile View All Posts By User
IrC
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2710
Registered: 7-3-2005
Location: Eureka
Member Is Offline

Mood: Discovering

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 10:25


Quote: Originally posted by chief  
Nuclear power for the USA: Right, since invading Iran for Oil is no option after the Russians and Chinese have issued their warnings ... :D
==> Also the petro-dollar ist nearly history: In the past, just by the coupling of Oiltrade and the US-currency, there was always enough Oil for the country ... but these days are gone ...
==> The first one who opposed against the petro$ was Saddam Hussein: He was going to trade Oil in other currencies ... .. _that_ was the reason for the 2 gulf-wars ..
==> Now Iran did the same, other countries are following ...

So yes: For the Americans it might be nuclear- and coal- time soon ...

[Edited on 21-2-2010 by chief]


Explain why you twist the thread into a euro-socialists brainwashed political bash attack against the US. Iraq invaded Kuwait and the Kuwaiti citizens testified before the UN begging for help. As usual, just like WWI and WWII the US is expected and asked to liberate them since the world knew just like the WW's you create your own problems yet fail to solve them on your own. The Kuwaitis knew they would get no help from you. Our thanks? As always we invaded them for oil according to you yet we still buy oil from elsewhere. I for one am tired of hearing this same worn out lie. We still buy our oil from elsewhere, we do not steal it from anyone. So if we are to believe you the US can quickly overtake any nation yet fail each time to take the oil or whatever other resources you claim was the motivation.

You up the ante now claiming we had intentions to go after Iran for their oil but are afraid to do so because the russians or chinese tell us not to. I just cannot wait until Iran is a nuclear power since they hate you as much as they hate us. With their limited science you are so much closer to them than we are. There is justice after all.

Before anyone complains I am being political keep in mind fair play. If you are going to turn a thread into a political hack attack against me and mine expect we have the right to be heard to refute these accusations as well.




"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" Richard Feynman
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Ozone
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1267
Registered: 28-7-2005
Location: Good Olde USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Integrated

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 10:54


Talk is cheap and Obama will give you whatever is put up onto his teleprompter. I'll save the criticism and/or accolade until I either see new reactors being commissioned (along with a revival of the R&D sector that was destroyed by anti-nuke sentiment in the mid 90's) or I do not.

O3




-Anyone who never made a mistake never tried anything new.
--Albert Einstein
View user's profile View All Posts By User
hissingnoise
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 3920
Registered: 26-12-2002
Member Is Offline

Mood: Pulverulescent!

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 11:03


Getting nuclear fusion to work after the trillions it's swallowed up would solve a few problems for a lot of people.
But there's no real guarantee it'll ever work?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
chief
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 630
Registered: 19-7-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 12:22


Sorry: You are beeing political, while I just only outlined the real reasons of the high oil-prices.


Saddam Hussein, by the way, was the buddy of you Americans
==> ... and your country even had delivered those chemical weapons that he had used ...
His mistake was the planned abandoning of the $ in oil-trading ... , which is obvious from the timepoint of the first US-invasion there ...

The Kuweities, by the way, were stealing oil from under Iraq, worth billions a year (even back then, when the $ had still some residual value), read here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/09/14/world/main233586.s...

So Saddam Hussein even only lighted his own oil there, which just happened to sprinkle out of "kuweitian" sources ...

[Edited on 21-2-2010 by chief]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
IrC
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2710
Registered: 7-3-2005
Location: Eureka
Member Is Offline

Mood: Discovering

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 12:36


You changed the subject in your first post with the very first line of said post while claiming you are not being political, and stating I am. While you may be used to dealing with those of low IQ you are not doing so now. The thread is not about the price of oil nor does it need US bashing being so not so cleverly slipped in with the alteration of the subject. Putting it simply just for you some of us want to see more nuclear power here and the price of gas here is still around the same 2.25/gal it was six years ago.




"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" Richard Feynman
View user's profile View All Posts By User
smuv
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 842
Registered: 2-5-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: Jingoistic

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 14:00


...About waste: Currently most nuclear waste (ie, fuel assemblies) are stored on-site at nuclear power plants. Usually the fuel assemblies are stored in the spent fuel pool for years until it is no longer 'hot' and eventually it goes into a semi-perminant dry storage. Needless to say, when the plants were built in the 70s, there was no foresight to have fuel assemblies stored on-site. When it comes to water waste, it is passed through resin beds and cleaned up, until it is minimally radioactive, and a lot of this waste is simply discharged per permits from environmental/nuclear regulatory bodies.

[Edited on 2-21-2010 by smuv]




"Titanium tetrachloride…You sly temptress." --Walter Bishop
View user's profile View All Posts By User
turd
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 800
Registered: 5-3-2006
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 15:22


Quote: Originally posted by IrC  
While you may be used to dealing with those of low IQ you are not doing so now.

You sure? So far everyone hid their IQ points quite well and this posting is not going to change that :D. BTW: Two characteristic traits of low-IQs I observed are
1) they are firmly convinced that they are smarter than mostly anyone else
2) they react very angrily for apparently no reason

Apart from that, I agree with your distaste of socialism and think we should put an end to it. First thing would be to close down the military-industrial complex. Taxpayer's money spent to occupy good-for-nothings. Give everyone of them a TV, a livelong supply of beer and save billions!
Next step: Abolish all drug laws, proceed with the now useless prison guards and DEA employees as with the soldiers. Dictating what people put in their metabolism? Can't get more socialist than that.
A bigger problem will be to get rid of those mindless flag-wavers. Subordinate to a symbol of the state? Only completely brainwashed socialists would do that!

If this will not work out for you, the last resort is to move to one of those nasty european countries where they eat frog legs (highly recommended!), snails and whatot. I hear they are much less socialist... :D
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Mr. Wizard
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1040
Registered: 30-3-2003
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 16:58


You have to wonder who actually scripts the words on the TelePrompTer. I don't like his politics but I am for nuclear power. As to putting the waste at the Yucca Mountain Radioactive Waste Repository in Nevada, I can't think of a better place in the whole world. They have already been setting off atomic bombs there for decades, both above and below ground. It's dry, safe and isolated. Senator Reid, Øbama's butt buddy has made a career of spiking the place; in spite of the much needed jobs it would bring to Nevada. Nevada gets over 10% of it's electric power from nuclear plants located outside the state, still Reid acts 'holier than thou' when it comes to storing the waste. Instead of storing the waste in a central safe spot, it is stored in hundreds of locations throughout the country, guarded by minimum wage security guards. That makes a lot of sense, and will one day bite us if it's not remedied. I'm sure the security companies do a great job vetting their employees for terrorist tendencies, just like the military.

You have to ask yourself, ' Cui bono', who benefits? Obviously cheap nuclear power doesn't benefit those who are selling gas, oil, and coal to power plants. The cynic in me asks if this is just an arm twist of the oil companies for more donations to ACORN or the like.

[Edited on 22-2-2010 by Mr. Wizard]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Sandmeyer
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 784
Registered: 9-1-2005
Location: Internet
Member Is Offline

Mood: abbastanza bene

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 17:53


Ok it basicly works like this,

-Boooohh! demons are coming to destroy you (pick your favourite one, there are all kinds), you are American, they hate you for that, and want to destroy you.

-OK, it is horrible, but let me protect you, then of course I will have to run your life...

So you work and you pay tax, but you give that to me and I use it to protect you against the demons.

Your money I give to the pentagon (the protector). The protector then directly or indirectly funds high technology (tax-funded) research.

The disciplined scientists and engineers work very hard to defend their country from demons, and they come up with all kinds of things along the way. Keep in mind that you are paying for this with the tax.

Now, all these discoveries and technologies that your money funds materialize into products that can be sold by big private corporations.

And indeed, this is when some (not all, only the big boys) private corporations enter the scene (they do not want to enter to early, it would be foolish). They have a very fancy and clever way to build a fence around the research the disciplined scientists and you made possible. So now you can buy for example an iPod.

Up to this point the government is good, and also up to the point when it bails out big privately owned financial institutions, ok, you are not supposed to hate it until now, you should start to hate it a bit later if it starts doing all kinds of crazy things. Like using the tax to build public transportation, when it provides you free healthcare and income upon retirement. This is when the government is trying to run your life, you know, try to take your freedom of choice away from you. You want to be able to freely choose (between coke and pepsi), you are a fee individual living on the free market.




View user's profile View All Posts By User
IrC
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2710
Registered: 7-3-2005
Location: Eureka
Member Is Offline

Mood: Discovering

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 18:49


Quote: Originally posted by turd  
Quote: Originally posted by IrC  
While you may be used to dealing with those of low IQ you are not doing so now.

You sure? So far everyone hid their IQ points quite well and this posting is not going to change that :D. BTW: Two characteristic traits of low-IQs I observed are
1) they are firmly convinced that they are smarter than mostly anyone else
2) they react very angrily for apparently no reason

Apart from that, I agree with your distaste of socialism and think we should put an end to it. First thing would be to close down the military-industrial complex. Taxpayer's money spent to occupy good-for-nothings. Give everyone of them a TV, a livelong supply of beer and save billions!
Next step: Abolish all drug laws, proceed with the now useless prison guards and DEA employees as with the soldiers. Dictating what people put in their metabolism? Can't get more socialist than that.
A bigger problem will be to get rid of those mindless flag-wavers. Subordinate to a symbol of the state? Only completely brainwashed socialists would do that!

If this will not work out for you, the last resort is to move to one of those nasty european countries where they eat frog legs (highly recommended!), snails and whatot. I hear they are much less socialist... :D


You forgot :

3) they rant aimlessly proposing anarchy.

So really, are you sure you can see the forest when at tree level.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I do not believe anything Obama says period. He reminds me of someone stuck in a mad sci version of puppet master.

Listen to him when not reading the prompter. His use of words is disjointed. No fluency in what is supposed to be his native language. So while it would be nice to think he will increase nuclear power I give a snake more credibility.




"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" Richard Feynman
View user's profile View All Posts By User
franklyn
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2996
Registered: 30-5-2006
Location: Da Big Apple
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 18:50


Nuclear Power Plants are a boondoggle.
The only ones who make money off it
are the investment bankers who float
the bonds , the interest on which is paid
by the public ( state ).
Been there , done that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoreham_Nuclear_Power_Plant
I'd rather be sold the Brooklyn Bridge.

In totalitarian states the trouble makers
would be rounded up and sent east for
re-education and resettlement. Can't hardly
do that anymore , and I don't see how
wishes will translate into reality.
Gas will be $ 300 a pint before there is a
mandate for unbridled building of new
nuclear plants.

.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
IrC
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2710
Registered: 7-3-2005
Location: Eureka
Member Is Offline

Mood: Discovering

[*] posted on 21-2-2010 at 20:38


"Nuclear Power Plants are a boondoggle."

I imagine you are correct. I look at it like this. Money aside they add to the MW/Hr's in the grid but do not add pollution to the air like coal plants do. We must have the grid to exist therefore we should be realistic in our outlook. Even if the money thing is a loss they produce power with no carbon being pumped into the air. If we lose money we still gain by keeping the grid alive and the air a little cleaner, overall a worthwhile expenditure. Better than everything our governments spend our money on now not related to improving life on earth. Storage is not really an issue. We can video record the surface of mars and make movies inside the Titanic I have no doubt we can seal up waste for millennia and during this time we can breathe better as opposed to burning coal for the same MW/Hr's the nuclear waste represents.




"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" Richard Feynman
View user's profile View All Posts By User
chief
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 630
Registered: 19-7-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 22-2-2010 at 02:08


@IRC: Let's just hope you are better at chemistry than at economics ...
==> ... else I would recommend you become a theoretical philosopher there too ... before you blow yourself up :o

Obama has exactly one main and urgent reason to think about energy at all: The vanishing purchasing-power of the $ .
==> Even any further military engagements are too expensive for the country ...

Nuclear power: What was it good for in the past:
==> Enriching material for weapons ... ,
==> depleted Uranium for ammunition ...
==> ...
==> and maybe also for electricity .
Those were the reasons for any country so far to adopt nuclear power ...

The world might be a better place without it.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
bquirky
National Hazard
****




Posts: 316
Registered: 22-10-2008
Location: Perth Western Australia
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 22-2-2010 at 02:39


dont most US coal power plants run on US mined coal anyway ?

Allthoug we do ship alot of LNG to Calafornia so i think you guys should build gas plants ;)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
entropy51
Gone, but not forgotten
*****




Posts: 1612
Registered: 30-5-2009
Member Is Offline

Mood: Fissile

[*] posted on 22-2-2010 at 06:28


I hate to confuse this idiocy with facts, but
Quote:
In France, as of 2002, Électricité de France (EDF) — the country's main electricity generation and distribution company — manages the country's 59 nuclear power plants. As of 2008, these plants produce 90% of EDF's and about 78% France's electrical power production (of which some is exported), making EDF the world leader in production of nuclear power by percentage. In 2004, 425.8 TWh out of the country's total production of 540.6 TWh of electricity was from nuclear power (78.8%). It is important to note though that this makes up only about 16% of France's final energy consumption.

France is the world's largest net exporter of electric power, exporting 18% of its total production (about 100 TWh) to Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Britain, and Germany, and its electricity cost is among the lowest in Europe.


Source

View user's profile View All Posts By User
entropy51
Gone, but not forgotten
*****




Posts: 1612
Registered: 30-5-2009
Member Is Offline

Mood: Fissile

[*] posted on 22-2-2010 at 06:51


Quote: Originally posted by franklyn  
Nuclear Power Plants are a boondoggle.
The only ones who make money off it
are the investment bankers who float
the bonds , the interest on which is paid
by the public ( state ).
Been there , done that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoreham_Nuclear_Power_Plant
From that link:
Quote:
On February 17, 1983, the Suffolk County Legislature announced with a 15-1 vote that the county could not be safely evacuated.[5] Newly elected governor of New York, Mario Cuomo, ordered state officials not to approve any LILCO-sponsored evacuation plan.[5]

The plant was completed in 1984. In 1985 LILCO received federal permission for low-power 5 percent tests.

Confidence in LILCO took a hit in 1985 when it took nearly two weeks to restore power to all of the island following Hurricane Gloria.

Between 1985 and 1989, as local communities continued to refuse to sign the necessary evacuation plan, LILCO proposed asking the U.S. Congress to approve a law for the evacuation — a move which went nowhere.

On February 28, 1989, Cuomo and LILCO announced a plan to decommission the plant, which involved the state taking over the plant and then attaching a 3 percent surcharge to Long Island electric bills for 30 years to pay off the $6 billion price tag.
There was nothing wrong with the plant. The flaw was in the thought processes of the politicians, not the technology.

View user's profile View All Posts By User
chief
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 630
Registered: 19-7-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 22-2-2010 at 08:11


Yes: The french have a lot of atomic electricity ; and they were one of the first states with nuclear weaponry ...
==> They even were the only ones keen enough to let off a hydrogen-bomb in the ocean ... :D

Guess why Charles de Gaulle could afford to make Nixon abandoning the gold standard ...
==> Thats how the french ruined the US-economy ... long-term-wise spoken ...

View user's profile View All Posts By User
 Pages:  1  

  Go To Top