Nuclear Power - you thoughts?

Talk about serious issues here!
User avatar
Dr Frook
FWG Mod
Posts: 9039
Joined: 28 Aug 2009, 05:35
Fr00k$: 3889.70
Location: freaksville
Contact:

Nuclear Power - you thoughts?

Postby Dr Frook » 01 Jun 2011, 08:05

It has it's benefits, but obviously there are a lot of negatives associated with it.

What are your thoughts on the issue of using nuclear power?

After the Japan quake, people should seriously reconsider placing a nuclear powerplant near the coastline and in an earthquake zone. You're just asking for trouble if you do that...

if we don't use nuclear, what can we use as an alternative? It needs to provide enough electricity to replace nuclear!
The BUGBLATTER BEAST HAS SPOKEN, ALL HAIL THE BLATTERER!
Image

User avatar
Zados
FWG Mod
Posts: 789
Joined: 02 Sep 2009, 09:05
Fr00k$: 100.00
Location: on tour

Re: Nuclear Power - you thoughts?

Postby Zados » 01 Jun 2011, 08:06

germany is erasing the nuclear power within the next 11 years

every reactor shall be shut down till 2022 and we are building new off shore windparks and more other regenerative power.
R.I.P. Dad ... you'll never be forgotten!

User avatar
mmm
FWG Mod
Posts: 2383
Joined: 13 Dec 2010, 23:19
Fr00k$: 24.05
Location: Straight outta Compton

Re: Nuclear Power - you thoughts?

Postby mmm » 02 Jun 2011, 17:29

FWG Leader wrote:It has it's benefits, but obviously there are a lot of negatives associated with it.

What are your thoughts on the issue of using nuclear power?

After the Japan quake, people should seriously reconsider placing a nuclear powerplant near the coastline and in an earthquake zone. You're just asking for trouble if you do that...

if we don't use nuclear, what can we use as an alternative? It needs to provide enough electricity to replace nuclear!

Copy and paste from my last argument. Japan has no choice but to use nuclear energy due to a lack of conventional energy sources (such as coal or oil), and the relative inefficiency of more "green" alternative energy (such as wind or solar power). Nuclear energy is more efficient than the other green energies, and does not contribute to global climate change as much, or at least in the same way, as conventional power sources.
Then there are those who annoy me just as much, who say that Japan should have been prepared for a 9.0 magnitude earthquake that triggered a 70 foot tsunami, followed by numerous aftershocks measuring above 5 on the Richter scale. Implementing structural support that could withstand all of that would cost an unimaginable amount of money. And this is just for one reactor. What about all the other ones?
In terms of safety, the only reasons nuclear energy is viewed so negatively is the information spread during the Cold War about the nuclear bomb, and Chernobyl. Yes, whenever a nuclear disaster happens, it is devastating. But how often do they happen? Should America investigate an alternative to airplanes because of the terrorist attack on 9/11?
They didn't place the plant in a major earthquake zone, and I'm sure if they had a safer place to put it, the government would have built it there. Again, this costs money. Okay then, let's do without nuclear energy. This wouldn't go over very well, as nuclear power provides a third of Japan's total energy.http://augustafreepress.com/2011/04/06/ ... ar-energy/
I agree that we should invest in alternative sources of energy, but the transition has to be gradual. In the meantime, nuclear energy continues to be the best source of alternative energy for Japan and environmentally similar countries.
Heres my new input. Germany has enough alternatives to nuclear energy to make the transition, and I think that it will turn out ok. Personally, I think the motivation was political (I'm different from sleezy bureaucrats who place profit before human life), but the ends may justify the means
Image For trying.

User avatar
Aros
FWG King
Posts: 786
Joined: 09 Jun 2010, 02:24
Fr00k$: 8.50

Re: Nuclear Power - you thoughts?

Postby Aros » 03 Jun 2011, 18:07

i think its a good idea,germany has enough alternative sources to replace nuclear
Just some guy who used to come here a lot.

If for some reason you want to get in touch (idk what people on here use nowadays):
Discord: pablo#3067
Reddit: pablo-8
Or just PM me on here and I'll give you my username for something you do have.

User avatar
azazel_raven_
FWG Prince
Posts: 410
Joined: 30 Apr 2011, 03:40
Fr00k$: 0.00
Location: Where ever the people who ask complicated questions aren't.
Contact:

Re: Nuclear Power - you thoughts?

Postby azazel_raven_ » 05 Jun 2011, 01:05

BAD.
I love you guys. All of you <3

Cortex strength:V-19 X.C
Powers: telapathic abilities, nature, and technology.

User avatar
mmm
FWG Mod
Posts: 2383
Joined: 13 Dec 2010, 23:19
Fr00k$: 24.05
Location: Straight outta Compton

Re: Nuclear Power - you thoughts?

Postby mmm » 05 Jun 2011, 21:50

azazel_raven_ wrote:BAD.

*Facepalm* GOOD. That eery silence after our one word answers should be filled with evidence. I'm just not going to repaste my argument.
Image For trying.

User avatar
BIG EYES
FWG Earl
Posts: 341
Joined: 05 Feb 2010, 00:54
Fr00k$: 114.15
Location: San Jose, California

Re: Nuclear Power - you thoughts?

Postby BIG EYES » 07 Jun 2011, 22:46

mmm wrote:
FWG Leader wrote:It has it's benefits, but obviously there are a lot of negatives associated with it.

What are your thoughts on the issue of using nuclear power?

After the Japan quake, people should seriously reconsider placing a nuclear powerplant near the coastline and in an earthquake zone. You're just asking for trouble if you do that...

if we don't use nuclear, what can we use as an alternative? It needs to provide enough electricity to replace nuclear!

Copy and paste from my last argument. Japan has no choice but to use nuclear energy due to a lack of conventional energy sources (such as coal or oil), and the relative inefficiency of more "green" alternative energy (such as wind or solar power). Nuclear energy is more efficient than the other green energies, and does not contribute to global climate change as much, or at least in the same way, as conventional power sources.
Then there are those who annoy me just as much, who say that Japan should have been prepared for a 9.0 magnitude earthquake that triggered a 70 foot tsunami, followed by numerous aftershocks measuring above 5 on the Richter scale. Implementing structural support that could withstand all of that would cost an unimaginable amount of money. And this is just for one reactor. What about all the other ones?
In terms of safety, the only reasons nuclear energy is viewed so negatively is the information spread during the Cold War about the nuclear bomb, and Chernobyl. Yes, whenever a nuclear disaster happens, it is devastating. But how often do they happen? Should America investigate an alternative to airplanes because of the terrorist attack on 9/11?
They didn't place the plant in a major earthquake zone, and I'm sure if they had a safer place to put it, the government would have built it there. Again, this costs money. Okay then, let's do without nuclear energy. This wouldn't go over very well, as nuclear power provides a third of Japan's total energy.http://augustafreepress.com/2011/04/06/ ... ar-energy/
I agree that we should invest in alternative sources of energy, but the transition has to be gradual. In the meantime, nuclear energy continues to be the best source of alternative energy for Japan and environmentally similar countries.
Heres my new input. Germany has enough alternatives to nuclear energy to make the transition, and I think that it will turn out ok. Personally, I think the motivation was political (I'm different from sleezy bureaucrats who place profit before human life), but the ends may justify the means

Image
Excalibur: I AM THE BESTEST
Sylvie: QUACK!
Kit Kat: ill fight you
Rainshard: Im very gay
Excalibur: ex > zia
Lukia: he doesnt do it - lukia 2915
The Divine Potato: Tumeric is the Spice of Life
Icamenal: Im the humblest guy in the world!

User avatar
mmm
FWG Mod
Posts: 2383
Joined: 13 Dec 2010, 23:19
Fr00k$: 24.05
Location: Straight outta Compton

Re: Nuclear Power - you thoughts?

Postby mmm » 10 Jun 2011, 02:50

BIG EYES wrote:
mmm wrote:
FWG Leader wrote:It has it's benefits, but obviously there are a lot of negatives associated with it.

What are your thoughts on the issue of using nuclear power?

After the Japan quake, people should seriously reconsider placing a nuclear powerplant near the coastline and in an earthquake zone. You're just asking for trouble if you do that...

if we don't use nuclear, what can we use as an alternative? It needs to provide enough electricity to replace nuclear!

Copy and paste from my last argument. Japan has no choice but to use nuclear energy due to a lack of conventional energy sources (such as coal or oil), and the relative inefficiency of more "green" alternative energy (such as wind or solar power). Nuclear energy is more efficient than the other green energies, and does not contribute to global climate change as much, or at least in the same way, as conventional power sources.
Then there are those who annoy me just as much, who say that Japan should have been prepared for a 9.0 magnitude earthquake that triggered a 70 foot tsunami, followed by numerous aftershocks measuring above 5 on the Richter scale. Implementing structural support that could withstand all of that would cost an unimaginable amount of money. And this is just for one reactor. What about all the other ones?
In terms of safety, the only reasons nuclear energy is viewed so negatively is the information spread during the Cold War about the nuclear bomb, and Chernobyl. Yes, whenever a nuclear disaster happens, it is devastating. But how often do they happen? Should America investigate an alternative to airplanes because of the terrorist attack on 9/11?
They didn't place the plant in a major earthquake zone, and I'm sure if they had a safer place to put it, the government would have built it there. Again, this costs money. Okay then, let's do without nuclear energy. This wouldn't go over very well, as nuclear power provides a third of Japan's total energy.http://augustafreepress.com/2011/04/06/ ... ar-energy/
I agree that we should invest in alternative sources of energy, but the transition has to be gradual. In the meantime, nuclear energy continues to be the best source of alternative energy for Japan and environmentally similar countries.
Heres my new input. Germany has enough alternatives to nuclear energy to make the transition, and I think that it will turn out ok. Personally, I think the motivation was political (I'm different from sleezy bureaucrats who place profit before human life), but the ends may justify the means

Image

WORD. Now I have a trendy ending to my manifesto.
By the way, did you hear? You haven't heard? About the word? BIRD BIRD BIRD, BIRD IS THE WORD....Your fault for risking a picture from Family Guy.
Image For trying.

User avatar
Foopzheart
SKREEEEEEEE
Posts: 3693
Joined: 26 Jun 2010, 22:36
Fr00k$: 630.35
Location: SKREEEEE
Contact:

Re: Nuclear Power - you thoughts?

Postby Foopzheart » 10 Jun 2011, 16:25

Nuclear power has its ups and downs (and big booms!).
vaguely present
Image
SKREEE SKREEEEEE SKREEEEEEEEE

User avatar
wii dude is the best
FWG Baron
Posts: 290
Joined: 08 Feb 2011, 15:29
Fr00k$: 0.00
Location: The Dark Voids of your mind

Re: Nuclear Power - you thoughts?

Postby wii dude is the best » 11 Jun 2011, 00:28

The U.S.A should lower the amount of nuclear usage, three mile island set the bomb after the meltdown in `79.
Hello reader. Look behind you, i probably just saved you from the thing behind you, if not im sorry i couldn't help


Return to “Serious Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest