Nuclear power is to way to go to save earth?


Status
Not open for further replies.

denniskee

Senior Member
Oct 26, 2003
5,468
2
0
bukit batok
Visit site
#1
just watch a tv show in cna, looking at the world and the climate change due to the carbon dioxide causing the green house effect, and that we have no practical solution to generating the large amount of electricity without emmiting co2 other tha hydro-electric (but this also create a big inpact to the environment and ecco-system), it seems nuclar power plant is the way to go.

accident does happens, so a melt down is possible, but small price when compared to not doing anything, or rather no alternative practical solution. scientist say 20 more years will be the point of no return.
 

deckard

New Member
Oct 13, 2006
1,241
0
0
#3
in the future, all cars will be powered by Mr Fission. Remember the de Lorean from back to the future? :)

No more worries! :) :bsmilie:
 

compro_1975

Senior Member
Apr 24, 2005
1,983
0
0
#4
wat abt the waste? we may create more problem if the waste is not properly taken care of especially in countries where there is corruption:angry:
 

initialE24

New Member
Dec 18, 2004
1,381
0
0
#6
just watch a tv show in cna, looking at the world and the climate change due to the carbon dioxide causing the green house effect, and that we have no practical solution to generating the large amount of electricity without emmiting co2 other tha hydro-electric (but this also create a big inpact to the environment and ecco-system), it seems nuclar power plant is the way to go.

accident does happens, so a melt down is possible, but small price when compared to not doing anything, or rather no alternative practical solution. scientist say 20 more years will be the point of no return.
the wisdom of mankind, coming to nothing......:cry:
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
#7
instead of thinking how to create more energy, why not think of how to REDUCE energy consumption. Sometimes it works better the other way round.

Every individual counts. If it doesn't starts from you, then who?

I agree with TMC, we all deserve to die.
 

jmmtn4aj

New Member
Jan 1, 2007
994
0
0
Singapore
flickr.com
#8
A meltdown is a small price to pay? Hahahaha. In case you didn't know, Chernobyl dispersed radioactive dust around nearly half the world which directly lead to hundreds of thousands of cases of cancer, deformities in newborns, and mutation in wildlife. Even now, the shell that surrounds Chernobyl is eating up billions a year in maintenance and miles of land in either direction of the plant are still uninhabitable.

If nuclear power will ever be the way to go, that it has to be completely fail-proof. Unfortunately the process of building a nuclear power plant is already extremely expensive, never mind the installing of advanced and extensive safety features. Price is exactly the reason why so few countries are using nuclear power plants right now.
 

eikin

Senior Member
Apr 27, 2004
10,193
0
0
東京 Tokyo
#9
there's a photo essay on magnumphotos.com showing the after effects of the chernobyl incident. the pictures are too disturbing so i shan't put the link here, anyone interested to find out the extensiveness of the damage on human beings can do a quick search.
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
#10
one of the technical reasons why Chernobyl failed was because they had incompetent control engineers that stupidly implemented a positive feedback control loop.

EDIT: For the non-technically inclined, you can reproduce this effect by putting your mic in front of the speakers and hear that nice tone coming from soft to loud and it doesn't stop getting louder until your system burns out.
 

forward

New Member
May 27, 2002
390
0
0
Singapore
Visit site
#11
The issue of gobal warming had been brought up more than a decade
ago, however government of many countries turn a death ear.
Only a couple of months ago the argument on its effects has been
broadcast daily over BBC and that in turn brought about the news
in the press worldwide.

Currently the countries are preparing to an agreement on how they
should work together to produce an effective strategy to reduce
this danger.

Fortunately even our SM has encouraged to be part of this program
and as photography community we should do our part by starting
bit by bit. Here are some immediate task one can take:

1) Use a smaller size monitor instead of trying to expand into the
27inch or bigger screen.

2) Switch off pc instead of putting it on standby mode when not in use.

3) Use a foldable bicycle or regular street bicycle for
commuting whenever possible even though you have a car
or a motorbike.

4) Don't use the air-conditioner, use a fan instead or open up all
the windows of your room if you feel warm.

Any other suggestions are welcomed.....

Thanks in advance. :) :heart:
 

jmmtn4aj

New Member
Jan 1, 2007
994
0
0
Singapore
flickr.com
#13
one of the technical reasons why Chernobyl failed was because they had incompetent control engineers that stupidly implemented a positive feedback control loop.

EDIT: For the non-technically inclined, you can reproduce this effect by putting your mic in front of the speakers and hear that nice tone coming from soft to loud and it doesn't stop getting louder until your system burns out.
One of. There were several reasons, and those reasons are still not the only things that can go wrong with nuclear reactors, computers, and their human operators and designers.
 

lovells19

Senior Member
Oct 31, 2003
3,409
0
36
40
Deep Deep in the sea
www.flickr.com
#14
the main reason why we cannot go green is money

we go green, you know how much money the oil company will lose?

best way is for human being to go extinct, thats when earth will be able to heal itself.
 

forward

New Member
May 27, 2002
390
0
0
Singapore
Visit site
#15
the main reason why we cannot go green is money

we go green, you know how much money the oil company will lose?

best way is for human being to go extinct, thats when earth will be able to heal itself.
This statement is not far to being correct, it is the truth as predicted
in the holy writing that the earth will one day be destroyed by water
and fire.

Humans are also notoriously known as the environmental destroyer.
Just wait for the day to come, where forest fire, floods and the nom
will take millions of lives away. So no countries are spared from
this future happensings.

:(
 

redstorm

New Member
Oct 29, 2002
456
0
0
Hougang
Visit site
#16
the main reason why we cannot go green is money

we go green, you know how much money the oil company will lose?

best way is for human being to go extinct, thats when earth will be able to heal itself.
Yeah, wait for a few milllion years for the earth to heal itself before life begins all over again. Then comes the next civilisation where we start off as caveman again. :bsmilie:
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
#17
One of. There were several reasons, and those reasons are still not the only things that can go wrong with nuclear reactors, computers, and their human operators and designers.
It is the major contributing factor. Had it employed a negative feedback system. Anything going out of control will be spiralled to a diminishing output.
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
#18
the main reason why we cannot go green is money

we go green, you know how much money the oil company will lose?

best way is for human being to go extinct, thats when earth will be able to heal itself.
exactly, sad but true.

since sec school I've been hand-carrying my small items without plastic bags. Many have scoffed at me for not getting my money's worth.
 

CYRN

Senior Member
Nov 14, 2002
4,575
0
36
photoevangel.com
#19
Firstly... I tot there's a need to clear up some misconception about Chernobyl. It happened because of a poorly managed "experiment".

http://www.uic.com.au/nip22.htm

Impact was bad, but not as bad as one think.

Even the sites where the 2 atomic bombs were detonated are relatively "rebuilted". Tho the radiation and physchological effects are still lingering.
 

Apr 20, 2006
1,087
0
0
#20
Did you read the news a couple of days back? There's this element/compound called Helium-3 that is found on the moon. Through the cold fusion process, 6cu-tonne can yield enough energy to power UK for a year.

The Russians are rushing to the moon to mine it commercially. The US was initially reluctant (probably from Oil lobbying), but they too realised that they cannot lose out on this race. So NASA will be going up to mine also.

It should be a viable energy source in around the mid of this century. It won't be any earlier because they cannot do cold fusion in such a large scale because we are technologically not quite there yet.

So, I think the moon will save the earth.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom