Power sources of the world

[Black Mage]

I'm making this in order to let those who expressed concern regarding nuclear vs non-nuclear in the Japan Quake thread a place to discuss with no fear of being banned for being off-topic.

To start of the conversation, I am pro-nuclear, thinking it is a pinnacle of human engineering and remaining one of the best and safest power sources on the world.

P.S. Please keep it civil.

[Viperdream]

Nuclear is the best way to go imo. Those oil and coal power sources give long term problems.

If you've seen Aftermath, those documentaries on National Geographic, you will see that those coal power plants will give big problems when the world gets overpopulated and the governments build more of those.

Nuclear power plants might explode and give away loads of radiation. But if the plant gets controlled often and in top condition (unlike those in Japan) then there shouldn't form any problems.

[Deleted]

I support it to, until we perfect fusion technology.

p.s. Such a cute avatar.

[Fuzzzie]

Research into fusion power needs to be accelerated. Simply because if there is an accident a fusion reactor will just stop, it wont blow up or cause massive radioactive problems.

M/AM power supply would be cool if we could produce anti-matter in a cost effective manner. However it's far too expensive with our current technology.

Finally, we could harness microscopic singularities to provide power. That's almost science fiction, but it's still a way to go.

For now, considering we only harness a fraction of 1% of the sun, I would put work into that. Nano-Engineered solar panels for efficiency supplemented by wind and geo-thermal power plants for the green approach.

[Black Mage]

Don't forget fuzzzie, though, that a breakthrough such as fusion technology would forever change the world. No more energy problems. What would happen to the economy? The big companies don't want this. They will try to counter it with all their power.

[Carmakazie]

except the company's that have their hands in Nuclear power

but yea, the Oil/coal/wind/water people would prolly try this massive smear campaign saying nuclear reactors give X number of people cancer each year.

but, if it can be perfected and made more safe, even Al Gore would have nothing to say against it

[artemishunter1]

Nuclear is the best way to go imo. Those oil and coal power sources give long term problems.

If you've seen Aftermath, those documentaries on National Geographic, you will see that those coal power plants will give big problems when the world gets overpopulated and the governments build more of those.

Nuclear power plants might explode and give away loads of radiation. But if the plant gets controlled often and in top condition (unlike those in Japan) then there shouldn't form any problems.

Actually Japan's nuclear facilities were in top condition. The problem is that the earthquake damaged the facilities too much, resulting in the breakdown of most failsafe devices in the facilities. If the earthquakes was in the U.S. we would have had another neuclear meltdown like russia's and three miles island. The japanese knew already they lived in earthquake prone zone, so they built all buildings much more sturdier than those in the U.S. the breakdown of Japanese facilites could not have been prevented. the japanese don't cut corners.

[Deleted]

I think they can only delay it for a period.

It's safer, cheaper, better, infinite. It's just better.

[Viperdream]

Actually Japan's nuclear facilities were in top condition. The problem is that the earthquake damaged the facilities too much, resulting in the breakdown of most failsafe devices in the facilities. If the earthquakes was in the U.S. we would have had another neuclear meltdown like russia's and three miles island. The japanese knew already they lived in earthquake prone zone, so they built all buildings much more sturdier than those in the U.S. the breakdown of Japanese facilites could not have been prevented. the japanese don't cut corners.

They really weren't. The company that runs them, TEPCO, had gotten several orders to repair the plant. But they never did it.
They have quite a lot of scandals, search them and you'll understand it.

[Rocketsurgeon]

Don't forget fuzzzie, though, that a breakthrough such as fusion technology would forever change the world. No more energy problems. What would happen to the economy? The big companies don't want this. They will try to counter it with all their power.

I've seen more than one water(hydrogen) energy device. People who make those seem to have this odd tendency to wind up dead. The ones who made the water torch and got in bed with the US government are still around though.

[haxartus]

Research into fusion power needs to be accelerated. Simply because if there is an accident a fusion reactor will just stop, it wont blow up or cause massive radioactive problems.

The cost is too big right now. The ITER's tokamak costs like €16 billion. That's a single reactor.

[Deleted]

The cost is too big right now. The ITER's tokamak costs like €16 billion. That's a single reactor.

They're building a new, more powerful one in France tho if I'm not mistaken.

[MerinPally]

<- Pro Nuclear

I'm kind of slightly completely totally obsessive over Particle Physics and although I know I'll never get there after university (college atm), Antimatter has always intrigued me and I see that as the way forward, along with the possibilty of Photon Powered "Sails" around the planet. However, being a chemist, Hydrogen is what I'm forced to look at.

Alas, Biochemistry also fascinates me... must...find...nitrifying...secret...be...success...

On Topic - Nuclear is definately the way forward, without a shadow of a doubt. None of that pansy solar - this should bide us over until some breakthrough happens with Antimatter (i hope) as once Antimatter can be produced at less that billions of £ per 0.0000000000000000000001 grams or something insane, Antimatter Annihalations will be the thing to go for.

[Alraml]

The main problem with nuclear power is of course the waste product but I still think that one day we'll be able to break down the waste product entirely with improved technology.

Other than that it's much more efficient, cleaner and cheaper. Shame it's a finite resource

I lol'd so hard when UK environmentalists were using Japan as a case study for halting government nuclear power plans

[haxartus]

They're building a new, more powerful one in France tho if I'm not mistaken.

That's the reactor I'm talking about. The construction started in 2008 and it will be ready in 2018, with D-T reaction starting in 2026.
But with a cost of €16 billion is too high for mass production of such reactors, so we won't see fusion power plants any time soon.

[Deleted]

I'm pro-nuclear power...there will be accidents and the consequences will be horrible but harsher consequences will mean much better safety imo. Ideally i'd still like easy re-usable sources but nuclear is a good way to supply us.

[MerinPally]

I lol'd so hard when UK environmentalists were using Japan as a case study for halting government nuclear power plans

Wow, I hadn't heared of this... No wonder our country is going down the shitter. The governments "50% of students at university" idea is coming back to bite them in the ass, only so many jobs require a degree in Media Studies/Theatre Studies/Sociology - (you can also do a BTEC in wheel clamping at Birmingham univ, and Zen Surfing elsewhere - don't forget Grass Field Technician degrees - the world only needs so many).

[Fuzzzie]

The cost is too big right now. The ITER's tokamak costs like €16 billion. That's a single reactor.

Adjust for inflation and tell me how much went into nuclear research and development.

[McFrotton]

They really weren't. The company that runs them, TEPCO, had gotten several orders to repair the plant. But they never did it.
They have quite a lot of scandals, search them and you'll understand it.

So it was all fine before the earthquake, every old power plant got repairs to do, they were not in an ''alarming condition''

[Lothaeryn]

I agree that nuclear power is a very practical solution to our energy problems globally, but there are major issues to consider with such technology:

Nuclear Plants must be maintained at 100% efficiency in order to prevent them from becoming a disastrous event down the road. And sadly, people who work in the power industry don't do this to begin with.

If say, all of the coal power plants were replaced with Nuclear with the same exact staff that ran the coal plant, (but were taught new procedures to maintain the new facility) I still think the plant would be highly inefficient compared to ones currently operating elsewhere. The people running the power industry are just not prepared for such a transition, and unless more regulation is placed on their current means of electricity production, they wont consider revising their policies any time soon.

not only do we have to consider this, but we must also consider environmental factors that could damage the Nuclear Power Plants as well. Japan's reactor is a perfect example. Although it was built with earthquakes in mind, it is still at a critical levels after the fact. Nuclear power would have to be reserved for more stable locations around the world. Placing a Nuclear Reactor near the San Andreas Fault line in California would be disastrous (or putting it in tornado alley)

last but not least, we would have to keep these plants secure from people trying to smuggle the nuclear tech from the facility, there are numerous forms of organized crime that could use nuclear tech as a highly profitable venture, or other groups intent on destroying a country's government from within.

The UN already fears that Iran would build nuclear weapons with the tech they got to build their plants, and imagine now what would happen if every nation decided to build a nuclear plant somewhere in their country. The possibility of one of these plants being compromised by a criminal organization would be highly probable, since every nation would not have the same security regulations in place.

nuclear tech is the best alternative source of energy, but sadly humanity would abuse this tech much too quickly