Go Back   EcoModder Forum > Off-Topic > The Lounge
Register Now
 Register Now
 

View Poll Results: Nuclear plant in YOUR town
Support it 30 58.82%
Oppose it 16 31.37%
Don't Care 5 9.80%
Voters: 51. You may not vote on this poll

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-29-2011, 07:57 AM   #31 (permalink)
Dartmouth 2010
 
SVOboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hanover, NH
Posts: 6,427

Vegan Powa! - '91 Honda CRX DX
Team Honda
90 day: 66.52 mpg (US)
Thanks: 92
Thanked 114 Times in 82 Posts
Send a message via AIM to SVOboy Send a message via MSN to SVOboy Send a message via Yahoo to SVOboy
I agree that as far as expectations are concerned it's a pretty safe bet, but I think Japan has an opportunity to take the billions that would go into starting a new program and putting it into major consumer incentives to purchase solar, which would not only generate a good flow of revenue here, but also encourage some of Japan's companies to expand their considerable solar investments.

Plus, and this is not something that most people outside of Japan really understand too well, Japanese people really don't like nuclear power to begin with. The public was basically dragged kicking and screaming into accepting nuclear power, and this incident, which is going to drag on and dominate the news for months, isn't going to liken the new generation of Japanese to nuclear at all.

Anyway, when all is settled down I think we could see the Japanese government taking advantage of what seems like a big opportunity at the right time.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 03-29-2011, 09:26 AM   #32 (permalink)
Hypermiler
 
PaleMelanesian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,302

PaleCivic (retired) - '96 Honda Civic DX Sedan
90 day: 69.2 mpg (US)

PaleFit - '09 Honda Fit Sport
Team Honda
Wagons
90 day: 57.04 mpg (US)
Thanks: 580
Thanked 414 Times in 271 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arragonis View Post
At the same time, how many workers are confirmed as dead in accidents in coal mines, oil extraction, open cast mining, oil refining etc. ?

Worth comparing.
As things stand right now, this is the alternative to nuclear. Renewables aren't ready for the scale needed... yet. I'm eager for that day to come, but it's not here yet.

And then there's this. Coal affects millions of people every day. Nuclear has a few dramatic events, but those are dwarfed by coal's daily operations.

chart from this source data: http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/dea...gy-source.html
__________________



11-mile commute: 100 mpg - - - Tank: 90.2 mpg / 1191 miles
  Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to PaleMelanesian For This Useful Post:
Arragonis (03-29-2011), Piwoslaw (03-29-2011)
Old 03-29-2011, 10:21 AM   #33 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
NeilBlanchard's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth
Posts: 7,652

Mica Blue - '05 Scion xA RS 2.0
Team Toyota
90 day: 42.48 mpg (US)

Forest - '15 Nissan Leaf S
Team Nissan
90 day: 156.46 mpg (US)

Number 7 - '15 VW e-Golf SEL
TEAM VW AUDI Group
90 day: 155.81 mpg (US)
Thanks: 3,054
Thanked 2,656 Times in 1,655 Posts
Germany is already getting ~15%+ from renewables, and they are planning to get 100% of their electricity from renewables by ~2050:



Germany is not all that sunny -- if they can do it, then the USA certainly can, too. There are several other renewable energy sources that could be used as well.
__________________
Sincerely, Neil

http://neilblanchard.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 10:32 AM   #34 (permalink)
aero guerrilla
 
Piwoslaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 3,541

Svietlana II - '13 Peugeot 308SW e-HDI 6sp
90 day: 58.1 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,056
Thanked 628 Times in 395 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arragonis View Post
At the same time, how many workers are confirmed as dead in accidents in coal mines, oil extraction, open cast mining, oil refining etc. ?

Worth comparing.
Quote:
Official Chinese statistics showed that 2,631 people died in 2009, and 3,215 in 2008.
Uranium Mining - Reaching Critical Will Factsheet
Quote:
According to reports by the International Commission for Radiological Protection (ICRP), work-related deaths in uranium mines are estimated at between 5, 500 deaths (for radiation workers @ 3 mSv) to 37, 500 deaths (for radiation workers @ 20 mSv) per million workers a year.

This compared with deaths in the manufacturing industry (estimated at 110 deaths per year per million workers) and the construction industry (estimated at 164 deaths per million workers per year)*.

* ICRP reports ICRP27/ICRP60.
As with coal and its emissions, nuclear radiation can be a slow killer, which means that many deaths do not show up in statistics.

Quote:
One of the most important findings of an inquiry within the USA Department of Energy in 1989 was that low doses of radiation, spread over a number of years, are just as dangerous as acute exposure. It means that the model used by the ICRP to determine the acceptable levels of exposure for workers is wrong. Science today understands what it did not fully comprehend in 1945 or perhaps even in 1968: there is no safe level of radiation.
IMO, humanity should pay more attention to wasting less and improving the efficiency of existing power plants (all types), instead of building more and more. As Pale mentioned, RE isn't ready to jump in and take over starting today, but it can, and should, be prioritized. I know that suddenly closing all power plants is not possible, but they can be upgraded, then phased out over 50-100 years, while renewables gradually take over.
__________________
e·co·mod·ding: the art of turning vehicles into what they should be

What matters is where you're going, not how fast.

"... we humans tend to screw up everything that's good enough as it is...or everything that we're attracted to, we love to go and defile it." - Chris Cornell

Piwoslaw's Peugeot 307sw modding thread

  Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 10:40 AM   #35 (permalink)
aero guerrilla
 
Piwoslaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 3,541

Svietlana II - '13 Peugeot 308SW e-HDI 6sp
90 day: 58.1 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,056
Thanked 628 Times in 395 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard View Post
Germany is already getting ~15%+ from renewables, and they are planning to get 100% of their electricity from renewables by ~2050:


Germany is not all that sunny -- if they can do it, then the USA certainly can, too. There are several other renewable energy sources that could be used as well.
On a good day, Spain can get up to 75% of its power from RE, while its average for 2010 was 35%:
Spain Supplied With 75% Clean Energy On A Great Day In January
__________________
e·co·mod·ding: the art of turning vehicles into what they should be

What matters is where you're going, not how fast.

"... we humans tend to screw up everything that's good enough as it is...or everything that we're attracted to, we love to go and defile it." - Chris Cornell

Piwoslaw's Peugeot 307sw modding thread

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Piwoslaw For This Useful Post:
NeilBlanchard (03-29-2011)
Old 03-29-2011, 10:44 AM   #36 (permalink)
The PRC.
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Elsewhere.
Posts: 5,304
Thanks: 285
Thanked 535 Times in 384 Posts
The German model is based on artificially high tarrifs for renewable subsidies and a desire to remove Nuclear from their network. As an outsider I wonder how much the US public would accept such market manipulation to finance such things.

The government in Germany has been making noises about extending the life of nuclear plants by 8-10 years to maintain capacity and cost competiveness of power to industry. If that happens the renewables market will decline and the growth may stop, solar investment is declining already.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piwoslaw View Post
IMO, humanity should pay more attention to wasting less and improving the efficiency of existing power plants...
+1

The key here is reducing what we use domestically - there is a hell of a lot of waste there which costs us all cash, which is what Frank said about 2 pages ago

I just don't see nuclear as a desirable or evil demon, just something we have to live with maybe for now maybe for longer.
__________________
[I]So long and thanks for all the fish.[/I]
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 11:25 AM   #37 (permalink)
Hypermiler
 
PaleMelanesian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,302

PaleCivic (retired) - '96 Honda Civic DX Sedan
90 day: 69.2 mpg (US)

PaleFit - '09 Honda Fit Sport
Team Honda
Wagons
90 day: 57.04 mpg (US)
Thanks: 580
Thanked 414 Times in 271 Posts
Nice - thanks for the updates / corrections on renewables.

Totally agree about efficiency, though. It's the low hanging fruit.
__________________



11-mile commute: 100 mpg - - - Tank: 90.2 mpg / 1191 miles
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 12:46 PM   #38 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 865
Thanks: 29
Thanked 111 Times in 83 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVOboy View Post
I'd much rather live next to a nuclear plant than a coal plant, but at the same time, I don't really support building new reactors and instead favour heavy investment in alternative solutions (solar, wind, etc), so I voted "don't care."

However, I think the poll question is pretty clearly flawed, as it's not really asking anything. It's really just saying, would a nuclear plant v. no change be a good thing, which I think is a pretty silly question since that's not ever going to be the case. It's going to be a nuclear plant v some other source, some type of industry or manufacturing, etc.
The poll is valid even though it's not the question you might have preferred.

The question asked is a simple one: would you want to live near a nuclear plant? The poll topic is actually that of NIMBY. Often people are in favor of something as long as they don't have to live near it. There seems to be an element of hypocrisy in the NIMBY position, and that's the topic as it was framed.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 12:59 PM   #39 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,209
Thanks: 225
Thanked 803 Times in 589 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thymeclock View Post
The question asked is a simple one: would you want to live near a nuclear plant? The poll topic is actually that of NIMBY. Often people are in favor of something as long as they don't have to live near it. There seems to be an element of hypocrisy in the NIMBY position, and that's the topic as it was framed.
Not really, if you think about it. I don't want to live near anything (other than trees, mountains, etc), so there's no hypocrisy in my not wanting anything in my back yard, other than the aforementioned solar on my roof, personal wind turbine, etc. However, a lot of people obviously do want to live in or near urban areas, or at least choose to do so, and I'd rather have nuclear plants there than the current coal-fired plants.

And I really don't want to live downstream from a large hydroelectric dam, either.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2011, 01:16 PM   #40 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 865
Thanks: 29
Thanked 111 Times in 83 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf View Post
Not really, if you think about it. I don't want to live near anything (other than trees, mountains, etc), so there's no hypocrisy in my not wanting anything in my back yard, other than the aforementioned solar on my roof, personal wind turbine, etc. However, a lot of people obviously do want to live in or near urban areas, or at least choose to do so, and I'd rather have nuclear plants there than the current coal-fired plants.

And I really don't want to live downstream from a large hydroelectric dam, either.
It sounds like your motivation is more that of being reclusive than NIMBY-ish.

Since it is relevant to the thread, some may find this link interesting: click here

After all, one can not be merely not only NIMBY now, but also be NIABY, NAMBI and BANANA.

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com