Topic
Nuclear Energy
|
What is your opinion on it?
Personally I am all in for nuclear fission energy, at least until a powerplant that can achieve nonproblematic profitable nuclear fusion is developed. And I really hate the anti-nuclear "propaganda" being spread through the media, using misleading titles and questions such as "Will Fukushima be the next Chernobyl?" to spread the fear of nuclear energy amongst the general public for their own benefits. But hey, just my opinion. |
|
Fusion energy is where the future lies!
|
|
Sounds like the best option for the world, no greenhouse gasses, safer(debatable under such curciumstances) And cheaper in the long run, also they generate more power so that we don't need as many, as Prosit said earlier, Fusion is the way forward!
|
|
|
Edited by Prosít on 03/05/11 20:09 (BST)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4CVpxmZ4ng&feature=related
remember people Fusion energy the other side of the coin |
|
Sun, wind and waves people.
|
|
Every new tech is gonna have its dangers.
But without it humanity cannot develop. Nuclear power is just soo much mroe efficient than everything else currently available to us that it is a necessity for our development. And its not that dangerous at all to be honest. Most of the doomsday stuff is by people who dunno shiat about it. |
|
Fission seems nice, but it will still take some years to make it profitable. Also, in my vision its only the solution for stable, rich countries, since its high-tech.
Solar energy seems most promising to me, since the amount of solar energy reaching earth from the sun is huge. And I agree with the poster above, 90% of people dont know a #$%^about technologies. Like the nuclear radiation, Most people are against it because: a) They heard few words about it and it sounded scary (particulary the word "nuclear") and b) They cant see the danger with their eyes. In general, i think there should be more focus on the communication between science and and the public. |
|
With current demand and consumption nuclear is the only option we have unless you want rolling black outs.
Solar energy is probably the best renewable we have open to us, but current photovoltaics of decent efficiency are expensive to produce in large quantities. Wind is actually a terrible option; to power the UK with wind turbines we'd have to surround the coast with a 5 mile thick layer wind farm. For every wind farm you create, you need a fossil fuel plant running behind it incase it isn't windy. The quoted power output is the maximum, and over its lifetime a wind turbine will produce 30% of that on average. If it's too windy the turbine stops to halt damage to its blades and dynamo, while f it isn't windy enough it draws from the net to keep it spinning (as it takes a fair bit to get it going). Also, and probably the thing that is getting at me the most, is the amount of rare earth materials required to make the magnets for th dynamos for each and every turbine. They need a lot. This in turn is increasing the prices of electronic goods as currently mined resources go towards making turbines. Also, the mining process is destroying the Chinese countryside, where large deposits are located. They are costly, and not very efficient. Ok, now I have that off my chest, current nuclear reactors are incredibly safe. Pebble reactors utilise boron pebbles in the mix of fuel pellets. If the reactor gets too hot, the boron expands pushing the fuel away and slowing the reaction faster. Current reactors also uyse gravity to circulate coolant water, so the problems the fukushima plants are having now cannot happen unless earthquakes start turning gravity off. However, something that a lot of people probably dont know about, is that there is a btter, cheaper, and more abundant fissile material out there. Thorium (yup, that thing we all made into armour in vanilla) is a perfect material for this. Firstly, it is much more abundant in the earths crust compared to uranium which is costly and dangerous to mine. The nuclear reaction Thorium undergoes also does not produce more neutrons than it takes to complete it. To sustain the reaction they currently use a laser to initiate it. Hence the reaction cannot run away, for as soon as you deactivate the laser the reaction stops quickly. There are also several other potential safety measures, such as a metallic plug at the bottom that melts if the reactor gets too hot, causing all the fuel to drain away into a pan that spreads it thin. I am hoping to see more Thorium reactor prototypes. Until then more Uranium plants need to be commissioned and built to sustain what we as a race use. |
|
When talking about nuclear power, one needs to consider cold fusion. As a matter of fact, there is a hydrogen-nickel based cold fusion device currently planned to start production at several locations across the globe later this year.
It has been validated by the chairman of the Swedish Skeptics Society, among others: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3111124.ece Also, an interview by Ny Teknik of the inventor, Andrea Rossi: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POZrKGpipmo |
He doesn't refuse to release "any information". He is simply not releasing information on the catalyst, as he is waiting for a patent. In no way does that change the credibility of the device, as dozens of independent measurements have taken place. |
|
|
I'm also skeptical when it comes to cold fusion. Someone who says they can side step the conditions required for normal fusion, ie the immense pressures and heat in a star, is one to be taken with a pinch of salt. I did however always think some form of catalyst would have been the key to lowering the activation conditions, but not entirely. We still do not understand how catalysts function due to the speed of reactions that occur on them and the temporal resolution of current surface sensitive techniques.
The current Tokamaks pulse in a variety of lasers into a single point to initiate fusion. i believe that they've made some good advances recently on the way to breaking even, to ontaining a power output approaching the input. |
I'm also skeptical when it comes to cold fusion. Someone who says they can side step the conditions required for normal fusion, ie the immense pressures and heat in a star, is one to be taken with a pinch of salt. I did however always think some form of catalyst would have been the key to lowering the activation conditions, but not entirely. We still do not understand how catalysts function due to the speed of reactions that occur on them and the temporal resolution of current surface sensitive techniques. Well, there are several different kinds of fusion. The normal hot fusion is where you replicate the conditions in the suns corona, sorry, but there is NO evidence currently of fusion going on inside the sun, only in the corona, in order to brute force the fusion process. Then there is the method the Fleischmann–Pons experiment used, which is to get the atoms into an extremely tight crystal lattice, and thus break the Coulomb barrier. The E-Cat however, uses an entirely different mechanism, since it is not fusing the same atoms together, as in the case of the Tokamak or FP, but fusing hydrogen and nickel. Besides, having 80 watt input and 10 KW output means that the Tokamak is useless compared to the E-Cat. |
Im sorry? No evidence that there is fusion going on inside the sun? How about the very atoms that make up your body and everything around you? Let alone the power output the sun/stars produce can only be realistically caused by nuclear fusion by the Hydrogen cycle. |
|
I am all for fission energy. The only problem is that I do not want underdeveloped countries to have them, because fission is quite dangerous if something screws up. With incompetent governments that only wants nuclear reactors because they are efficient and completely ignores safety measures, I bet it isn't too exaggerated to say that yes, I am somewhat worried.
Japan isn't stupid though, and I think that the Japanese has handled this whole thing greatly. Gotta hate the media, yo. |
There may be some, but the vast weight of evidence goes against any such notion. As regards the atoms, heard about electrical transmutations? I did also say there is limited fusion going on in the suns corona, where the temperature can reach 15.000.000 kelvin. Last but not least, the sun is powered by interstellar electrical currents. It is the only thing that explains sun spots, the huge extremes in the suns output of x-rays (Just look at this picture http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/Images/basic/xray/xray_sun.gif) and so on. |
|
Edited by Limlight on 04/05/11 13:48 (BST)
Sun, wind and waves people. My country only as an investigation nuclear plant..... But we are investing in renewable energy sources, such as: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYzocwUfpNg&feature=related Its the future, nuclear power is not a clean energy.... And there will still be at least 50 years untill fusion energy (transforming Hydrogen atoms into heliun atoms) could be fully profictual, lets see how is the one being built in France will perform. So its not hippie as you say, its the future. |
