Nuclear power!

[Magical]

What does everyone here think of nuclear power? I'm referring to fission, not fusion.

Personally, I think it's fantastic. Except for one thing.

The US destroyed nuclear power. We could be using Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (LFTRs) but instead, the US chose to go for Uranium, for weaponry.

They are vastly more efficient, entirely safe and the fuel is currently considered useless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2vzotsvvkw

Your thoughts?

[Jackerlus]

Yeah, everyone uses uranium because they want the plutonium, which is a byproduct of uranium, for nuclear weaponry. Imagine how much safer (including a much decreased threat of nuclear bombs and missiles) and more efficient nuclear power could be without the minds of the self-centered governments poking at it...

[Magical]

Well, global warming would not be as much of a problem!

[Straight]

Nuclear power is great! Until it goes wrong (*cough*Russia, Japan*cough"). And nuclear fusion would be great (If we could find away to process all that excess heat).

However, In my house we make our own power. Even though we live on a busy road, we are completely disconnected from the Gas and Electricity lines. This means that at the end of the month, our bills are £0. Additionally to this, We are carbon negative! We burn the hydrogen out of wood, then we dispose of the carbon in a sustainable manner. We do this with: an array of solar panels on our roof (facing south); Two solar water heaters; Wood burning stove; and extremely efficient LED lighting (we couldn't even detect any power usage).

Now, for the funny side of the story. In my city, the council is run by the Eco Party. When we proposed the designs for our house, they said to us "No" because it would be too obstructive (There are three solar pannels which poke 5 cm above the roof line which you have to look hard for). We came back to them (Eight times) with new designs, using ideas which they told us to add/remove... and still they refused. After the ninth planning refusal (2 years with no roof over our heads) we went ahead with the plans and they did nothing to stop us. Since then, our neighbors have literally sent us death threats. One person said that he would get the SAS to snipe me, and another said that he would run me over. Crazy?!

[Magical]

Nuclear power is great! Until it goes wrong (*cough*Russia, Japan*cough"). And nuclear fusion would be great (If we could find away to process all that excess heat).

However, In my house we make our own power. Even though we live on a busy road, we are completely disconnected from the Gas and Electricity lines. This means that at the end of the month, our bills are £0. Additionally to this, We are carbon negative! We burn the hydrogen out of wood, then we dispose of the carbon in a sustainable manner. We do this with: an array of solar panels on our roof (facing south); Two solar water heaters; Wood burning stove; and extremely efficient LED lighting (we couldn't even detect any power usage).

Now, for the funny side of the story. In my city, the council is run by the Eco Party. When we proposed the designs for our house, they said to us "No" because it would be too obstructive (There are three solar pannels which poke 5 cm above the roof line which you have to look hard for). We came back to them (Eight times) with new designs, using ideas which they told us to add/remove... and still they refused. After the ninth planning refusal (2 years with no roof over our heads) we went ahead with the plans and they did nothing to stop us. Since then, our neighbors have literally sent us death threats. One person said that he would get the SAS to snipe me, and another said that he would run me over. Crazy?!

Well, nuclear power would not go wrong if it was utilised correctly (Thorium, not Uranium for weaponry).

It is amusing that the "Eco" Party is against green technology.

The death threats are quite insane, and to be honest, I can't believe people would be that stupid. I mean, creationists are one thing, but this! It takes the cake!

[TheBigUnit]

Mind if I ask, why are ur neighbors angry

Would u dispose waste from fusion the same as fission?

Nuclear power is great if there is a way to disspose prperly

[Magical]

Well, for example, Deuterium-Tritium fusion would produce Helium 4, which is a stable isotope. The trouble is the neutron also emitted is an issue.

But Thorium fission in LFTRs is the best method of generating power until we have giant solar panels in space. These would also serve to slow down or halt global warming, by limiting the sun's electromagnetic radiation getting into the atmosphere.

[Gigablue]

LFTRs are much better than the current uranium reactors, but even those are better than other energy sources, like coal. LFTRs could provide power without having to worry about radioactive waste and the potential for a meltdown.

Fusion would be an even better source of energy. The amount of energy generated is much greater and the byproducts are safer. The chance of a meltdown is almost nonexistent. Unfortunately we don't have the technology to build a fusion reactor, but it's not all that far away

I think the ideal energy source would be antimatter. All the matter is converted to energy and its several times more efficient than fusion or fission, not to mention hundreds of times more efficient than conventional energy. Unfortunately, for this to work, we would need to find a significant store of antimatter and a way to contain it. Our technology is nowhere good enough, but it would be the ultimate energy source if we could exploit it.

[TheBigUnit]

Also the ultimate weapon :)

[Magical]

LFTRs are much better than the current uranium reactors, but even those are better than other energy sources, like coal. LFTRs could provide power without having to worry about radioactive waste and the potential for a meltdown.

Fusion would be an even better source of energy. The amount of energy generated is much greater and the byproducts are safer. The chance of a meltdown is almost nonexistent. Unfortunately we don't have the technology to build a fusion reactor, but it's not all that far away

I think the ideal energy source would be antimatter. All the matter is converted to energy and its several times more efficient than fusion or fission, not to mention hundreds of times more efficient than conventional energy. Unfortunately, for this to work, we would need to find a significant store of antimatter and a way to contain it. Our technology is nowhere good enough, but it would be the ultimate energy source if we could exploit it.

Fusion has massive issues of temperature. The temperature needed is extreme.

Antimatter isn't an ideal energy source simply because of the extreme danger involved in moving it and the easy at which it can be weaponised - simply turn the containment field off the antimatter off.

Instead, we should transition from nuclear fission to giant solar panels in space -blocking some of the sun's EMR, and so slowing down/averting global warming till we can solve it.

[Gigablue]

Fusion has massive issues of temperature. The temperature needed is extreme.

Antimatter isn't an ideal energy source simply because of the extreme danger involved in moving it and the easy at which it can be weaponised - simply turn the containment field off the antimatter off.

Instead, we should transition from nuclear fission to giant solar panels in space -blocking some of the sun's EMR, and so slowing down/averting global warming till we can solve it.

Fusion does require very high temperatures, but our technology isn't that far away from being able to do it. It's also a safer source that fission.

Antimatter would have problems, such as weaponization, and the risk or explosion, but if we found a better way to contain it, it could be an incredible energy source. We would also have to find some antimatter. I'm not saying it would be possible any time soon, but in a few millenia, if we're still around, it would be the only source powerful enough to meet our energy demands.

Giant solar panels in space could work, but only as a temporary measure. I would delay global warming, but we would still have to fix it on earth. There is also the problem of getting the energy to earth. You also have to worry about solar flares, which could severely damage your equipment.

[Human]

Everyone should love nuclear power... it may not be safe in places like Russia, where they didn't have enough resources or safety overall, or like Japan on a plate boundary which can't be helped, but places like Britain and USA are well developed and could handle these better.

[TheBigUnit]

Fusion does require very high temperatures, but our technology isn't that far away from being able to do it. It's also a safer source that fission.

Antimatter would have problems, such as weaponization, and the risk or explosion, but if we found a better way to contain it, it could be an incredible energy source. We would also have to find some antimatter. I'm not saying it would be possible any time soon, but in a few millenia, if we're still around, it would be the only source powerful enough to meet our energy demands.

Giant solar panels in space could work, but only as a temporary measure. I would delay global warming, but we would still have to fix it on earth. There is also the problem of getting the energy to earth. You also have to worry about solar flares, which could severely damage your equipment.

I read somewhere tht if particle accelertor goes bad, it won't be ur average fallout, if something really bad were to happen, there will be a black hole

[Gigablue]

I read somewhere tht if particle accelertor goes bad, it won't be ur average fallout, if something really bad were to happen, there will be a black hole

It's unlikely that a particle accelerator could produce a black hole. The energy required is much higher than that of any particle accelerator we currently have.

Also, I never mentioned a particle accelerator. I don't really know how that relates to what I said earlier.

[TheBigUnit]

Aren't Particle accelarators possibly able to make antimatter?

[Zarakly]

You know something else? We have the technology to make a car go 100+miles on 1 gallon of gas. You just need to turn the gas into a vapor and use that. It has been done before. You know what is stopping us though? They added lead into the gas so it wouldn't work efficiently. If people would stop caring about money and thinking about pollution and the future, we would be a lot further ahead then we are today.

[TheBigUnit]

Most gas doent have lead anymore

[Zarakly]

Well then I know what I'm doing my senior project on!

[Gigablue]

Aren't Particle accelarators possibly able to make antimatter?

Yes they are, but it wouldn't be possible to make antimatter in a particle accelerator then react it to get more energy than we put in. This would require the creation of energy, which is impossible. I was saying that we would have to find some reserve of antimatter in order for it to be a viable energy source. It's possible that no such reserve exists, but if it does, antimatter could be a very useful energy source.

[TheBigUnit]

That would have to be like at the edge of the universe

[TigerBoy]

I'd rather we use the modern nuclear technologies over fossil fuels (esp. coal), but I think renewable sources are also evolving to become increasingly viable. Deep sea turbines are looking like something that will benefit the UK, and complementary technologies are starting to plug gaps too, such as this liquid air energy storage system (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19785689).

And @Straight - that is mind boggling. By contrast we've had some green council homes built near us here not only so they are 'green' but so poor families placed in those homes have incredibly low energy bills.