IDrownFish wrote:
klausneck wrote:
IDrownFish wrote:
DeLoreans were popular
·Theme
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- New nuclear plants approved
New nuclear plants approvedFollow
Hold the phone! When did this happen?
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
lolgaxe wrote:
IDrownFish wrote:
klausneck wrote:
IDrownFish wrote:
DeLoreans were popular
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Good to see you noobs utilising your massive stockpile of fissile material for something useful.
I need to write to my MP complaining about the lack of nuclear power on my county...
Well okay, we have like three. It's just not enough damn it.
Edited, Feb 10th 2012 9:52am by Nilatai
I need to write to my MP complaining about the lack of nuclear power on my county...
Well okay, we have like three. It's just not enough damn it.
Edited, Feb 10th 2012 9:52am by Nilatai
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.
LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
Well, to be fair, you guys did have that tiny fire at Windscale back in '57.
Course, the little leak at Sellafield in '05 might not help your case.
Don't get started on our issues...we already had 3-eye'd fish from all the chemicals we dump in our fresh water. Adding some rads to them isn't gonna hurt, might even clean them up a bit.
Course, the little leak at Sellafield in '05 might not help your case.
Don't get started on our issues...we already had 3-eye'd fish from all the chemicals we dump in our fresh water. Adding some rads to them isn't gonna hurt, might even clean them up a bit.
Jophiel wrote:
Pack your own lunch and bring nothing but Pixie Stix and Pop Rocks and get your liberty on.
Tarub wrote:
Also, look at those comments. People are still pants on head retarded about nuclear energy.
Particularly love this one:
Quote:
First of all "George Carlin" your supposed to be dead. Second have you ever heard of Chernobyl, over a million deaths and counting. Third ********* is going to be much worse. Forth they don't even have anywhere to store the nuclear waste. Do some research buddy!
Yeah... Maybe point that "do some research" at yourself there buddy. Over a million deaths and counting? Confirmed deaths from direct radiation exposure is listed at 31. Death directly attributed to the disaster as a whole is 64. While there are some wild speculations about the deaths of anyone and everyone within hundreds of miles of the disaster (and even the most wild speculations stop in the quarter-million range), the reality is that the death rate of all those who even *might* have been exposed to radiation outside those listed in the direct death lists is not significantly higher than the death rate among any random population with similar demographics.
Even the worst nuclear disaster ever claimed fewer direct deaths (over 25 years) than a typical year of coal power does. But let's not let research get in the way of a good hysteria!
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
That's the worst George Carlin impersonation I've ever read, though.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
gbaji wrote:
Quote:
Second have you ever heard of Chernobyl, over a million deaths and counting.
Maybe they're counting the times I got headshotted in S.T.A.L.K.E.R.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
New Nukes! New Nukes! New Nukes!
/protest
/protest
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
klausneck wrote:
Well, to be fair, you guys did have that tiny fire at Windscale back in '57.
Course, the little leak at Sellafield in '05 might not help your case.
Don't get started on our issues...we already had 3-eye'd fish from all the chemicals we dump in our fresh water. Adding some rads to them isn't gonna hurt, might even clean them up a bit.
Course, the little leak at Sellafield in '05 might not help your case.
Don't get started on our issues...we already had 3-eye'd fish from all the chemicals we dump in our fresh water. Adding some rads to them isn't gonna hurt, might even clean them up a bit.
Semi-necro. Nationally we do quite well. I believe something like 15% of the UK energy production is from Nuclear energy.
I was specifically talking about my county, Kent. We've only got one Nuclear power station, in a place called Dungeness. We need more, but people are largely uneducated on the risks of nuclear power. It's something of a hot button phrase. People are all like "NO CHERNOBYL WARGARBL!".
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.
LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
My Dad's currently working at Indian Point. The place is nearing it's 40th & the end of it's run. The company that owns it, wants a 20 year renewal, but isn't sure if it's going to get one (considering it's original contract was 20 years and it wasn't built to go longer than 40)so isn't investing in infrastructure unless it has too (but is still making a killing in profit. Same company owns Plymouth and a few others in the NE). In fact, they recently lost an appeal for waivers on 100 fire code violations. Guess they'll have to fix that, now.
At the same time, the crap that went down in Japan came down to the fact they had spent fuel on site (and, ya know, 2 acts of god in a row). All sites in the NE store on site. We built a billion dollar facility in NV underground to store it, but NV won't let anyone send it there. Even though he still does work on the "hot" side in 40ish year old plants he helped build, he finds its much cleaner than working in coal plants.
It is kinda scary that he can only absorb +100x less rads than he could 40 years ago, though. I welcome new and better Nuke plants.
At the same time, the crap that went down in Japan came down to the fact they had spent fuel on site (and, ya know, 2 acts of god in a row). All sites in the NE store on site. We built a billion dollar facility in NV underground to store it, but NV won't let anyone send it there. Even though he still does work on the "hot" side in 40ish year old plants he helped build, he finds its much cleaner than working in coal plants.
It is kinda scary that he can only absorb +100x less rads than he could 40 years ago, though. I welcome new and better Nuke plants.
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin
Omegavegeta wrote:
My Dad's currently working at Indian Point. The place is nearing it's 40th & the end of it's run. The company that owns it, wants a 20 year renewal, but isn't sure if it's going to get one (considering it's original contract was 20 years and it wasn't built to go longer than 40)so isn't investing in infrastructure unless it has too (but is still making a killing in profit. Same company owns Plymouth and a few others in the NE). In fact, they recently lost an appeal for waivers on 100 fire code violations. Guess they'll have to fix that, now.
The current lack of permanent storage for spent fuel rods is the one thing that bugs me about moving forward with new plants. The 'worry about it later' attitude seems foolish when you're talking about nuclear energy.
Quote:
It is kinda scary that he can only absorb +100x less rads than he could 40 years ago, though. I welcome new and better Nuke plants.
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
I'd imagine new plants would be a bit safer than the old & decrepit things we have running now.
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin
Omegavegeta wrote:
I'd imagine new plants would be a bit safer than the old & decrepit things we have running now.
You'd be right. The issue from Nuclear power comes from the large start up costs. This is a bad reason to not invest in nuclear energy, though. It's a valuable stop gap in weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels. It buys time for "green" technology to be developed to a point where it is useful!
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.
LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
Nilatai wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
I'd imagine new plants would be a bit safer than the old & decrepit things we have running now.
You'd be right. The issue from Nuclear power comes from the large start up costs. This is a bad reason to not invest in nuclear energy, though. It's a valuable stop gap in weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels. It buys time for
The debates about "green power" are so annoying, I think we need to look elsewhere.
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
Debalic wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
I'd imagine new plants would be a bit safer than the old & decrepit things we have running now.
You'd be right. The issue from Nuclear power comes from the large start up costs. This is a bad reason to not invest in nuclear energy, though. It's a valuable stop gap in weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels. It buys time for
The debates about "green power" are so annoying, I think we need to look elsewhere.
That's why there's a real legitimate desire to build a moon base.
BrownDuck wrote:
Debalic wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
I'd imagine new plants would be a bit safer than the old & decrepit things we have running now.
You'd be right. The issue from Nuclear power comes from the large start up costs. This is a bad reason to not invest in nuclear energy, though. It's a valuable stop gap in weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels. It buys time for
The debates about "green power" are so annoying, I think we need to look elsewhere.
That's why there's a real legitimate desire to build a moon base.
Yup! Only problem is that it'll probably be some Russian politician/businessman who gets it done and holds the rest of the world in thrall. Can you imagine Putin with a chokehold on this kind of energy market?
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
BrownDuck wrote:
Debalic wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
I'd imagine new plants would be a bit safer than the old & decrepit things we have running now.
You'd be right. The issue from Nuclear power comes from the large start up costs. This is a bad reason to not invest in nuclear energy, though. It's a valuable stop gap in weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels. It buys time for
The debates about "green power" are so annoying, I think we need to look elsewhere.
That's why there's a real legitimate desire to build a moon base.
Would need a really long extension cord no?
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.
rdmcandie wrote:
BrownDuck wrote:
Debalic wrote:
Nilatai wrote:
Omegavegeta wrote:
I'd imagine new plants would be a bit safer than the old & decrepit things we have running now.
You'd be right. The issue from Nuclear power comes from the large start up costs. This is a bad reason to not invest in nuclear energy, though. It's a valuable stop gap in weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels. It buys time for
The debates about "green power" are so annoying, I think we need to look elsewhere.
That's why there's a real legitimate desire to build a moon base.
Would need a really long extension cord no?
They'd beam it back over lasers, and big transmitters/receivers (just don't accidentally fly through the path of the transmitted energy).
I've worked with a few wireless power/signal transmitters that work with high currents over short distances. Of course "high" in this case was you know... 24VDC maybe 5-10Amps. Only up to 10mm or so. Anything metal that is placed between them is heated up very quickly.
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
Would it be able to penetrate though. I know they have been doing this somewhat with HARRP but all the data shows it is absorbed by the Ionsphere. So if it was coming from the other direction the same would occur.
The only way to harvest this would be to find a way to harvest the Ionsphere, which might be possible if you have a large enough lightning rod.
The only way to harvest this would be to find a way to harvest the Ionsphere, which might be possible if you have a large enough lightning rod.
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.
rdmcandie wrote:
Would it be able to penetrate though. I know they have been doing this somewhat with HARRP but all the data shows it is absorbed by the Ionsphere. So if it was coming from the other direction the same would occur.
The only way to harvest this would be to find a way to harvest the Ionsphere, which might be possible if you have a large enough lightning rod.
The only way to harvest this would be to find a way to harvest the Ionsphere, which might be possible if you have a large enough lightning rod.
I just vaguely remember a bit on TLC about transmitting power from the Moon to Earth using them. I think they had small scale models lighting LEDs from a height, etc.
Of course, it's the same type of shows that talk about how if a black hole appeared over Earth, you'd be slowly stretched and would grow in height.
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
The energy loss via beams is pretty high.
It'd be better to just ship it back with the reduced cost of launching package vehicles from the moon to earth.
It'd be better to just ship it back with the reduced cost of launching package vehicles from the moon to earth.
Just as Planned.
Timelordwho wrote:
The energy loss via beams is pretty high.
It'd be better to just ship it back with the reduced cost of launching package vehicles from the moon to earth.
It'd be better to just ship it back with the reduced cost of launching package vehicles from the moon to earth.
Oooh! And to save cost even more, we could use clones to do the mining! What could possibly go wrong?
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
So yes to stem cell research?
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.
Recent Visitors: 234
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (234)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- New nuclear plants approved
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC