|
View Poll Results: Nuclear plant in YOUR town
|
|
Support it
|
  
|
30 |
58.82% |
|
Oppose it
|
  
|
16 |
31.37% |
|
Don't Care
|
  
|
5 |
9.80% |
03-28-2011, 12:10 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
NES Collector
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Millbury, MA
Posts: 94
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
Poll - Nuclear plant in your town
Pretty simple poll. Given whats going on with japan, I was wondering if people's opinion on nuclear power has changed. So if the government came to your town and wanted to put in a nuclear plant in your town would you support it, oppose it, or don't care.
__________________
"Would you like a jelly baby"

Miles Displaced By
Walking = 3.6
Last edited by echomodder; 03-28-2011 at 12:51 PM..
|
|
|
|
03-28-2011, 12:18 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 723
Thanks: 92
Thanked 60 Times in 42 Posts
|
No way. And I had the same opinion before the failure in Japan.
__________________

"We think B20 is for suckers" N. Cowell, Denver B100
"Climate change denial is a conclusion in search of a rationalization" labman57
|
|
|
|
03-28-2011, 12:25 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Failed State Belgium
Posts: 2,959
Thanks: 87
Thanked 283 Times in 228 Posts
|
As the crow flies, I work 2.09 miles from a nuclear power plant with 4 reactors.
It hasn't really bothered me before, and it doesn't bother me now.
That doesn't mean I particularly like nuclear energy, but it'll have to do until we get something better and safer.
At the moment, we're a long shot away from that goal.
|
|
|
|
03-28-2011, 12:32 PM
|
#4 (permalink)
|
|
Coasting Down the Peak
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: M I C H I G A N
Posts: 502
Thanks: 27
Thanked 32 Times in 26 Posts
|
I live in a town with a reactor. I don't work there.
I feel that of all electric generation types, nuclear has the least impact on the environment.
I am concerned about operating the plant correctly, and dealing with spent fuel correctly, which I don't think is happening now.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to skyl4rk For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-28-2011, 01:01 PM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
|
EcoModding Lurker
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 12
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
I live a mile from a reactor and I have no problem, we have had some maitenence issues come up the last few years but it defenatly supports our community and has been a general positive.
|
|
|
|
03-28-2011, 01:14 PM
|
#6 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,479
Thanks: 148
Thanked 138 Times in 97 Posts
|
Compared to my town's current option, one of the dirtiest coal plants in the country, nuclear sounds like a great thing to me.
__________________
- - - - -Best 11-mile commute: 105 mpg
- - - - -Best tank: 88.5 mpg / 1133 miles
|
|
|
|
03-28-2011, 01:40 PM
|
#7 (permalink)
|
|
n00b.... sortof..
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: SFL
Posts: 338
Thanks: 34
Thanked 18 Times in 17 Posts
|
I see nuclear power as a very viable option over coal burning plants.
granted, there are even better alternatives, but they arent very viable an option yet, so until they are, nuclear is fine for me.
__________________
~Mike
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to d0sitmatr For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-28-2011, 02:06 PM
|
#8 (permalink)
|
|
Absent without leave.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Englishman living in Scotland
Posts: 3,365
Thanks: 168
Thanked 250 Times in 187 Posts
|
I used to produce software used inside a power station (not as part of the station itself but as part of long term monitoring). Used to visit a number of them quite often and have no problem at all.
When it comes to the Japan incident we have to remember the plant involved is in an earthquake zone, has been around for nearly 40 years (and has therefore survived quite a few quakes in the past) and in that time has no doubt contributed far more than it cost to the Japanese economy during the 70s-2000s.
__________________
No longer here. Bye, and good luck to all.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Arragonis For This Useful Post:
|
|
03-28-2011, 02:31 PM
|
#9 (permalink)
|
|
"Inconceivable"
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Mancelona, MI
Posts: 252
Thanks: 1
Thanked 55 Times in 33 Posts
|
I think there should be more, small, community sized nuclear plants built. Something along the lines of those installed aboard submarines. Put the reactor housing below ground, and the only visible part would be the cooling tower and electrical grid.
__________________
moorecomp
Mancelona, MI
|
|
|
|
03-28-2011, 03:29 PM
|
#10 (permalink)
|
|
Wannabe greenie
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Yorba Linda, CA
Posts: 1,093
Thanks: 5
Thanked 51 Times in 40 Posts
|
I answered "support" with the following caveats:
1. It needs to be a safer design than the old 50 year old designs we have now. Something self-regulating, like pebble bed.
2. We need to get the political clout together to actually create reprocessing plants. We have the technology to reprocess spent fuel over and over again until there's pretty much nothing left but a tiny bit of low-grade material that's much easier to dispose of (and much less of it!)
3. The NRC needs teeth to actually enforce safety, and Congress needs to leave them the hell alone.
Oh, and I want an RTG for my basement.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Clev For This Useful Post:
|
|
|