4 ms·

people need to end this ridiculous obsession with fission for energy. solar and wind. thats all we need. all the nuclear stuff should be limited to research. wh

by bronz 10y ago

people need to end this ridiculous obsession with fission for energy. solar and wind. thats all we need. all the nuclear stuff should be limited to research. when fusion is ready then we can do that. solar, wind and batteries are here and ready to go. they are already rolling out. anything else is a complete distraction and waste of time. im so fucking tired of this.

debacle 10y ago
Nuclear has many benefits over solar and wind. I'm not a nuclear proponent, but in certain scenarios (especially ones outside our atmosphere), nuclear makes sense.
- bronz 10y ago
  this is always what they fall back on. its good in space. well this is earf mother fucker
  - dang 10y ago
    Please don't do this here. If you have a substantive point, make it thoughtfully; if not, please don't post until you do.
    - bronz 10y ago
      sorry
JoeAltmaier 10y ago
Wind and solar are many times more destructive to the environment that safe nuclear reactors. And many times less cost-effective. That's why nuclear keeps getting revisited - it works so well.
- bronz 10y ago
  no, actually they arent. and they dont produce radioactive waste that has be be stored for generations either. and the reactors are sometimes safe. and it only takes on bad one to do huge amounts of damage and kill tons of people. panels have never hurt or killed anyone.
  - Pyxl101 10y ago
    Wind farms are dangerous and result in many fatalities to humans and wildlife: http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf I'll skip over the 170 human fatalities and mention: > Environmental damage (including bird deaths) > 203 cases of environmental damage have been reported – the majority since 2007. This is perhaps due to a change in legislation or new reporting requirement. All involved damage to the site itself, or reported damage to or death of wildlife. 66 instances reported here include confirmed deaths of protected species of bird. Deaths, however, are known to be far higher. At the Altamont Pass windfarm alone, 2400 protected golden eagles have been killed in 20 years, and about 10,000 protected raptors (Dr Smallwood, 2004). In Germany, 32 protected white tailed eagles were found dead, killed by wind turbines (Brandenburg State records). In Australia, 22 critically endangered Tasmanian eagles were killed by a single windfarm (Woolnorth). Further detailed information can be found at: www.iberica2000.org/Es/Articulo.asp?Id=3071 and at: www.iberica2000.org/Es/Articulo.asp?Id=1875 > 600,000 bats were estimated to be killed by US wind turbines in 2012 alone. 1.4 million bird fatalities per annum are estimated if the US reaches it’s 20% target for wind generation. Solar farms are known to cause similar damage to wildlife. For example: http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/12918/20150223/solar-farm-set-hundreds-birds-ablaze.htm http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/12918/20150223/solar... > Unfortunately, though, anything that happens to wander too close to a boiling tower is very rapidly cooked by the focused sunlight. Workers at the Ivanpah solar power plant call these birds “streamers,” as they ignite in midair and plummet to the ground trailing smoke. Federal wildlife investigators said there was, on average, one streamer every two minutes — or hundreds of thousands of incinerated birds per year. Another expert estimated that the number is nearer 28,000 per year. BrightSource’s own estimate is around 1,000 roasted birds per year. BrightSource is reportedly looking to build an even-larger power plant, which wildlife officials say could be “four times as dangerous” to birds. BrightSource has offered $1.8 million in compensation for the expected bird deaths. https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/188328-californias-new-solar-power-plant-is-actually-a-death-ray-thats-incinerating-birds-mid-flight https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/188328-californias-new-s...
nikdaheratik 10y ago
The appeal of fission is really dead simple: each fission event releases 200x more energy than the equivalent chemical reactions. It would also take very large amounts of land to replace a single nuclear reactor with the equivalent in wind or solar. I'm not 100% sold on nuclear as being a panacea, but it is hardly a waste of time.
- acidburnNSA 10y ago
  You're right in sentiment. But by my figuring (which is energy per mass of fuel consumed), nuclear reactions release 2 million times more energy that chemical reactions. [1] If you got 100% of your energy as an average American (transportation, electricity, heat, etc.) for your entire life, you'd consume 1.5 soda cans of nuclear fuel. The tiny footprint associated with this incredible resource is why nuclear matters. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Energy_densities_of_common_energy_storage_materials https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Energy_densitie...

by bronz 10y ago

debacle 10y ago

Nuclear has many benefits over solar and wind. I'm not a nuclear proponent, but in certain scenarios (especially ones outside our atmosphere), nuclear makes sense.

bronz 10y ago
this is always what they fall back on. its good in space. well this is earf mother fucker
- dang 10y ago
  Please don't do this here. If you have a substantive point, make it thoughtfully; if not, please don't post until you do.
  - bronz 10y ago
    sorry

JoeAltmaier 10y ago

Wind and solar are many times more destructive to the environment that safe nuclear reactors. And many times less cost-effective. That's why nuclear keeps getting revisited - it works so well.

bronz 10y ago
no, actually they arent. and they dont produce radioactive waste that has be be stored for generations either. and the reactors are sometimes safe. and it only takes on bad one to do huge amounts of damage and kill tons of people. panels have never hurt or killed anyone.
- Pyxl101 10y ago
  Wind farms are dangerous and result in many fatalities to humans and wildlife: http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/accidents.pdf I'll skip over the 170 human fatalities and mention: > Environmental damage (including bird deaths) > 203 cases of environmental damage have been reported – the majority since 2007. This is perhaps due to a change in legislation or new reporting requirement. All involved damage to the site itself, or reported damage to or death of wildlife. 66 instances reported here include confirmed deaths of protected species of bird. Deaths, however, are known to be far higher. At the Altamont Pass windfarm alone, 2400 protected golden eagles have been killed in 20 years, and about 10,000 protected raptors (Dr Smallwood, 2004). In Germany, 32 protected white tailed eagles were found dead, killed by wind turbines (Brandenburg State records). In Australia, 22 critically endangered Tasmanian eagles were killed by a single windfarm (Woolnorth). Further detailed information can be found at: www.iberica2000.org/Es/Articulo.asp?Id=3071 and at: www.iberica2000.org/Es/Articulo.asp?Id=1875 > 600,000 bats were estimated to be killed by US wind turbines in 2012 alone. 1.4 million bird fatalities per annum are estimated if the US reaches it’s 20% target for wind generation. Solar farms are known to cause similar damage to wildlife. For example: http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/12918/20150223/solar-farm-set-hundreds-birds-ablaze.htm http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/12918/20150223/solar... > Unfortunately, though, anything that happens to wander too close to a boiling tower is very rapidly cooked by the focused sunlight. Workers at the Ivanpah solar power plant call these birds “streamers,” as they ignite in midair and plummet to the ground trailing smoke. Federal wildlife investigators said there was, on average, one streamer every two minutes — or hundreds of thousands of incinerated birds per year. Another expert estimated that the number is nearer 28,000 per year. BrightSource’s own estimate is around 1,000 roasted birds per year. BrightSource is reportedly looking to build an even-larger power plant, which wildlife officials say could be “four times as dangerous” to birds. BrightSource has offered $1.8 million in compensation for the expected bird deaths. https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/188328-californias-new-solar-power-plant-is-actually-a-death-ray-thats-incinerating-birds-mid-flight https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/188328-californias-new-s...

nikdaheratik 10y ago

The appeal of fission is really dead simple: each fission event releases 200x more energy than the equivalent chemical reactions. It would also take very large amounts of land to replace a single nuclear reactor with the equivalent in wind or solar. I'm not 100% sold on nuclear as being a panacea, but it is hardly a waste of time.

acidburnNSA 10y ago
You're right in sentiment. But by my figuring (which is energy per mass of fuel consumed), nuclear reactions release 2 million times more energy that chemical reactions. [1] If you got 100% of your energy as an average American (transportation, electricity, heat, etc.) for your entire life, you'd consume 1.5 soda cans of nuclear fuel. The tiny footprint associated with this incredible resource is why nuclear matters. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Energy_densities_of_common_energy_storage_materials https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Energy_densitie...