[Battle_Scarred_Galactico]

How are you going to "mine" the Earths crust ?

How are you going build all these reactors ?

How are you going to produce food for all these people with just nuclear power ?

[Doly]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Battle_Scarred_Galactico', 'H')ow are you going build all these reactors ?

[Battle_Scarred_Galactico]

Again how are you going to "mine" the Earths' crust ? I should imagine thats' damn hard at the best of times, let alone with a lack of oil to boot.

It's going to take loads of energy to build and maintain all these new nuclear plants. What about the waste?

I think we've done enough damage.

[Liamj]

So this is where the tech-cultists are hanging out...

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dezakin', 'A')ren't dams essentially permanent structures though? I mean given that most damable rivers are allready damed, the dam itself becomes a part of the ecosystem over time, does it not?

[Dezakin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')gain how are you going to "mine" the Earths' crust ? I should imagine thats' damn hard at the best of times, let alone with a lack of oil to boot.

[Battle_Scarred_Galactico]

"What in the construction of nuclear reactors is so petroleum intensive that it is impossible to imagine it in the absense of cheap oil?"


What do you think these things are made with... slave power ? machines need oil.

[Liamj]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dezakin', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hat do you think these things are made with... slave power ? machines need oil.

[Dezakin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'Y')ou think we can generate electricity using nukes built with electicity? Can you point us to a +10ton truck running on electricity?

[FatherOfTwo]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dezakin', 'F')irst, my thesis is that energy isn't 'declining'. Cheap liquid fuel is. Everything on your list is a vague commoditie without any details illustrating just why cheap petroleum alone can supply them. You're arguing from your gut here.

Finally, though I'm enamored with nuclear technology, I only advocate its use as an illustration of why we aren't running out of inexpensive energy. We are running out of inexensive fuel, which is an altogether different matter. I expect nuclear fission power will be replaced by something cheaper and more cost effective over the next century or two.

[Dezakin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') think most do underestimate the lengths to which we are going to go to keep things going. We will synthesize fuel. We will go absolutely gang busters on nuclear and coal, and the environment is going to suffer for it. But what Dezakin is missing is the enormous, and I mean enormous upheaval that the loss of cheap oil is going to create.

[FatherOfTwo]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dezakin', 'D')o I imply that there wont be consequences? There certainly will be at least a long recession as the economy contracts and restructures. It will not spell the end of civilization or the apex of human achievement however. In the big bad scenerio, which I honestly find laughibly implausible, millions die before the restructuring around nuclear electricity and expensive fuel. But we will restructure.

[Liamj]

YIMBY! I like it! Deserves a thread: "Show your faith in the nuclear age, in industry selfregulation and lowest-cost contracting, sign up now for a nuclear waste dump in your street!"

Wonder if we could get a finders fee from British Nuclear Fuels, they seem to be the deepest in sh*t right now.

But Deza, don't blame me if your neighbours lynch you.
If you want to keep it discrete, we can just post the waste to you and you can keep it under your bed. But make sure your childrens children^360 (e.g. plutonium 239 half life = 25,000yrs~360 generations, not 'centuries') agree, cos it'll be a family ...responsibility.

[Bytesmiths]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dezakin', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')’d like to propose building a waste storage warehouse right next to your place.

[Battle_Scarred_Galactico]

"If you want to keep it discrete, we can just post the waste to you and you can keep it under your bed."


haha, excellent

[mermaid]

Governments all over the world are debating about the nulear powerplants to keep them running(though the most plants are older than 30 years!!), but where do we leave the waste?!

The barrels were it is in are only free from leaking during 50 years!!! and after that time it is still dangerous for 2000 years???!!!!

And what about the centrifuges where they want to recycle the waste to use the uranium again? How will they work and how much energy is needed to recycle Uranium?

Isn't it a high risk to keep such old nuclear plants in to business? or can we sit and wait for another Tsjernobyl???

We better make tools to run on manpower, you better go to an antique-shop to get you tools and equipment.
We will go back in time with the problems of the future.

[philneville]

Well I know for a fact that tons of waste is dump off the coast of Somalia, no goverment no coastal guards, so not suprising really and loads of it got swept onshore after the Tsunami making some people that live in coastal areas ill.

[gg3]

25 years ago I was opposed to nuclear power based on the point that waste disposal had not yet been solved.

Since that time the French have done an admirable job building the infrastructure to recycle nuclear waste into new nuclear fuel. They now have something like a 20-year track record. To my mind, that solves the issue quite well enough to say it's a viable plan.

As far as operational safety issues are concerned, the new-generation reactor designs are basically melt-proof: in most of them, the fission reaction will shut itself down in the event of trouble, without need of expensive and complex systems that are the subject of controversy in the older reactor designs.

And don't forget, coal is full of radionuclides, all of which end up in the air when coal is burned. (Coal has enormous value as an industrial feedstock, its use as a fuel should be limited to railroad locomotives using the new advanced steam engine designs.)

Speaking here as someone with professional experience in the utility-scale wind industry, and a strong desire to see as much wind & solar online as possible: We can and should also build as much nuclear capacity as possible, and in fact for various technical reasons having to do with grid stability, it makes the best foundation for renewables.

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('gg3', '
')And don't forget, coal is full of radionuclides, all of which end up in the air when coal is burned. (Coal has enormous value as an industrial feedstock, its use as a fuel should be limited to railroad locomotives using the new advanced steam engine designs.)

[mermaid]

coal contains all the elements of the system, oil also, oil is liquid coal, it also contains various elements.
and the uranium and other radioactive elements in the ashes of coal are low active, there are other elements in, wich give us more trouble like arscenicum, lead,cadmium and other heavy metals.

so yes indeed, it is bad stuff to burn because the waste is also an huge problem, normally the industry puts it in concrete and ashphalt, so we live and walk in our own waste, that means that walls from buildings and the road is low radioactive and contains heavy material.

[thor]

Why not shoot nuclear waste into the sun by means of the very reliable Soyuz rockets? Besides, space is extremely 'polluted' with radioactivity.