Battle of Chernobyl

[Sternjaeger II]

the real problem about energy is that it's the biggest market on the planet, and as you know, market rules do not work to the advantage of mankind, but to the profit of few..

We do have alternative routes to follow: cold fusion is not a chimera as it used to be, and there are newer and more efficient techniques to be used in terms of nuclear energy.
Renewable energy is a modest patch up, it's not as reliable as others and still needs costly maintenance.

The real first, big step we should all do is reducing our consumption: I'm sure that if you look around yourselves right now you can find a lot of examples of unnecessary energy waste (AC transformers, lights on, PCs on that don't really need to be..). You know how many office kitchens have boilers that boil water 24/7? All that for a bit of coffee and tea?! We really really need to change our attitude towards energy consumption before pointing our fingers at the yet most efficient form of energy making.

[Kodoss]

The problem by renewable energy is not the production of it or its mainenance. The problem is that you have to storage it for the time, when their is no wind or sun shining.

But even for that their are solutions, you have only to convice the citizens(worst job ever).

[ingsoc84]

Originally Posted by nearmiss

Germany has plans to cease use of nuclear power within the next couple years. Germany has experienced nuclear radiation from Chernobyl and the they dont' want more of the same from their own plants.

About all that can be done is to keep governments from allowing anymore to be built. Since 3 mile island meltdown in USA not another plant has been built. The energy money grubbers are licking their chops, patiently waiting for the chance to build more.

So the "nuclear" moneygrubbers are just chomping at the bit to build more reactors? I though it was "big oil" that were the moneygrubbers in the energy business...do you mean to tell me that there are more than one band of money grubbers looking to steal our money to keep the lights on? Couldn't imagine that.

So what do you suggest? NO fossil fuels? No Nuclear power plants? Solyndra sure worked out well in the States, there is another 1/2 billion down the tubes for "clean efficient affordable solar energy". Maybe solar cells can power up all our homes and cars? Not likely.

Bad old nuclear power...Ohh my...and where is your proof that if the could have diverted all the money spent on nuclear construction, research etc., and developed a cleaner form of fossil fuel or other fuel? There is none, it's just an assumption.

The Germans shutting off their Nuclear reactors? Great..so one day when Russia decides they need to pay more for natural gas/electricity and they don't like the price, the Russians can shut it off during the winter just like they did in the Ukraine a few years ago, that ought to work out well.

As far as Chernobyl is concerned, it's amazing anything mechanical in that country works, let alone something built during the Soviet period. Have you ever been there? They still make gigantic apartment blocks just like they did in the 30's...cheap. shoddy, the entire country looks like a giant machine that has been left out to rust in the rain for the past 50 years, and that's being polite. It's truly amazing given their lack of building standards now and especially then that that reactor didn't have a problem day one when it went online.

[nearmiss]

Originally Posted by Pudfark

How about the STNP South Texas Nuclear Plant, built in the 1980's?

It was my understanding 3 mile island was the game stopper for further nuke plants.

[nearmiss]

Go to this site and watch videos.

http://divulge.co/truth/

Just get your head around this... half life on the plutonium in Chernobyl is 245,000 years. The entire recorded history of mankind is around 10,000 years.

They are dumping nuclear waste in the oceans, they are stock piling it 2,000 feet below ground in New Mexico.

The earth is a dynamic moving thing. Earth quakes, storms, tsunami and all manner of powerful natural disasters could at any time create an emergency with waste stockpiles. Not counting the disasters that can and have occurred at nuclear plants.

It is not about the alternatives at all. Nuclear radiation is beyond a horror story when it is uncontrolled and controlled.

They nuke proponents say the plants are safe. Yeah, just like at Fukushima. No doubt if you put your trust in some one with such a large responsibility you will at some point be let down. We read and see it every day in the news. The nuclear scientists are messing with the future of millions of people as they experiment on us with cancer hell.

There are options, but governments are manipulated by special interests all over the world. The Iranians don't want what their government is doing, but their government doesn't care what they want. The people that run many governments are empowered and make choices for their countries based on their own selfish purposes. It's all over the world like this, and the consequences are beyond horrific for all organic life.

There are options for conserving energy that have not be addressed in developed countries all over the globe. The Global warming thing has been proved to be a grandiose hoax, but I'm sure there have been positive things that came from it. I'm for just about trying anything as compared to the kind of eternal disasters associated with nuclear power.

Think on this... The huge sarcophagus they are building over Chernobyl will cost over a billion dollars. How long will that structure last? In light of the fact the half life of the plutonium enclosed by that sarcophagus will still be virulent 245,000 years from now what is the potential for disaster? A hundred years is like forever to us... human beings. We have no concept of such a length of time, and certainly should never usurp future generations with the burden of administering and dealing with our current energy problems.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

the real problem about energy is that it's the biggest market on the planet, and as you know, market rules do not work to the advantage of mankind, but to the profit of few..

We do have alternative routes to follow: cold fusion is not a chimera as it used to be, and there are newer and more efficient techniques to be used in terms of nuclear energy.
Renewable energy is a modest patch up, it's not as reliable as others and still needs costly maintenance.

The real first, big step we should all do is reducing our consumption: I'm sure that if you look around yourselves right now you can find a lot of examples of unnecessary energy waste (AC transformers, lights on, PCs on that don't really need to be..). You know how many office kitchens have boilers that boil water 24/7? All that for a bit of coffee and tea?! We really really need to change our attitude towards energy consumption before pointing our fingers at the yet most efficient form of energy making.

The german government has implemented subsaries for exactly that purpose, motivating house keepers to invest in energy saving measures like temperature dampening to bring consumption down. I agree, becoming more efficient in regards to energy waste is a big part of the equation. That also means lots of people having to get rid of their convinience in their daily lives, but pressing a button or shutting down the light can't be such a huge sacrifice.

In regards to cold fusion, I am curior what ITER will achieve, but I am not holding my breath for any feasible solutions from this direction anytime soon.

[Bewolf]

Originally Posted by ingsoc84

So the "nuclear" moneygrubbers are just chomping at the bit to build more reactors? I though it was "big oil" that were the moneygrubbers in the energy business...do you mean to tell me that there are more than one band of money grubbers looking to steal our money to keep the lights on? Couldn't imagine that.

What big business isn't a money grubber? It's part of their very nature, that has to be accepted and taken into account without any ill feelings. After all that is how capitalism works.

So what do you suggest? NO fossil fuels? No Nuclear power plants? Solyndra sure worked out well in the States, there is another 1/2 billion down the tubes for "clean efficient affordable solar energy". Maybe solar cells can power up all our homes and cars? Not

Actually, that is exactly where it will ultimately lead too. Fossil fuels are running out, the reserves we still have require ever more expensive and dangerous exploitation methods while world demand still climbs. Now you certainly can try to fight another couple wars to secure those reserves, but given the costs for modern wars (what was Iraq? 3 Trillion?), environmental costs and the potential damage to other industries like fishing, I am not sure the final bill really justifies that policy.

Bad old nuclear power...Ohh my...and where is your proof that if the could have diverted all the money spent on nuclear construction, research etc., and developed a cleaner form of fossil fuel or other fuel? There is none, it's just an assumption.

Nothing bad about it, just becoming a bit outdated and too many open questions that hang in the air for 40+ years without answers to this date. In Germany some 300 billion have been spend on nuclear energy subsidies over the last decades, compared to around 40 billion on renewables. There is no "proof" that this money would have achieved more if it went into nuclear, but the likelyhood is quite obvious, especially when looking at the recent achievements in developments of alternatives. Too many ppl assume we already are at the end of line in regards to alternatives development, while in fact we are just at the beginning. Broad application of those technologies will only accelerate this development, if comparisons to other new technologies and their history are taken into account.

The Germans shutting off their Nuclear reactors? Great..so one day when Russia decides they need to pay more for natural gas/electricity and they don't like the price, the Russians can shut it off during the winter just like they did in the Ukraine a few years ago, that ought to work out well.

huh? AFAIK, Russia needs our money as much as we need their gas. Even during the most tense days of the cold war the russians made their deliveries here. I doubt that will change anytime soon. There is a reason why there was a new pipeline built through the baltic going around countries like Ukraine who fail to pay their bills. (the political questions that raises have to be debated on another page)

As far as Chernobyl is concerned, it's amazing anything mechanical in that country works, let alone something built during the Soviet period. Have you ever been there? They still make gigantic apartment blocks just like they did in the 30's...cheap. shoddy, the entire country looks like a giant machine that has been left out to rust in the rain for the past 50 years, and that's being polite. It's truly amazing given their lack of building standards now and especially then that that reactor didn't have a problem day one when it went online.

I do not think slamming of russian tech, justified or not, has a lot to do with current day problems in regards to energy consumption and future developments.

[nearmiss]

Governments can control capitalism.

Governments can control just about everything. They have the power, whether they take it with despotic rule or acquire it by democratic vote.

It is incomprehensible to think that governments could be so uncaring about the potential of nuclear energy for eternal disaster.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by nearmiss

Governments can control capitalism.

Governments can control just about everything. They have the power, whether they take it with despotic rule or acquire it by democratic vote.

It is incomprehensible to think that governments could be so uncaring about the potential of nuclear energy for eternal disaster.

dude, I'm afraid you kinda miss an adequate sense of perspective on the matter: when BP had the massive oil spillage happening on the US coast, they shelled out 21 billion dollars (!!!) without the blink of an eye.. you know how many countries' debts you could fix with that amount of money?!
Governments bow in front of these giants, allowing them to do what they want. That's the real issue, the true nature of capitalism is one where there's no rules nor control.. capitalism is wild and has no mercy, man..

imo the capitalism you speak of isnt capitalism forthright. it is the basterdised version where the criminals have influence. By criminals i mean those reaping (or is that raping) to much from the economy and the people through the consideration of balance, balance of wealth that is.

i make no bones about saying true honest capitalism does work.

The equation for Growth is unsustainable with our present notion of capitalism, Of which this is.