Seems like India didn`t learn the lessons out of what happened in Japan last year.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/worl...68662.html




Now I come from a country in which the antinuclear sentiment is that big and widespread that a entire political party rose out of that protestmovement (the greens).
So I`d be very suprised if someone here would actualy argue for nuclear power, and not because it`s such a ludacris opinion to have from my point of view, but because I was never confronted with people who had that opinion.

I favor nuclear above energy options which burn fossil fuels.

But, if I remember right, Germany is one of the world's leaders in solar energy. You guys have the right idea. Solar is the future.

I live in a fucking desert. The sun shines 350 days a year. There should be solar panels everywhere you look but there aren't. The oil companies have things tied up so tightly that alternative energy is marginalized.

I think someone calls that "the invisible hand of the market."

(November 24, 2012 at 11:22 am)The_Germans_are_coming Wrote: Seems like India didn`t learn the lessons out of what happened in Japan last year.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/worl...68662.html




Now I come from a country in which the antinuclear sentiment is that big and widespread that a entire political party rose out of that protestmovement (the greens).
So I`d be very suprised if someone here would actualy argue for nuclear power, and not because it`s such a ludacris opinion to have from my point of view, but because I was never confronted with people who had that opinion.

How do you know? The lesson of Fukushima is even an obsolete nuclear powerplant, without a waterproof and airtight containment shell capable of withstanding a 747 flying into it, is nonetheless essentially capable of withstanding the third most powerful earthquake ever recorded, and one of the largest tsunami ever recorded, in rapid succession.

The weakness of Fukushima, only made a problem by reliance for grid power for black start and insufficient protection for blackstart backup, in fact easily overcome, and by no means common to nuclear plants. Put backup diesels in the main building rather than the basement, or provide watertight protection to the electrical control of the diesel generators, and Fukushima would still be running today.

How do you know this lesson is not learned???

As to solar power, even in Arizona with cheap subsidized Chinese panels, solar power can not achieve grid parity.

I wrote articles for a client who's heavily involved in green energy, and if I remember correctly, Germany has the highest efficiency in solar energy - despite the country having something like 70% cloud cover. Having also worked for a number of Indian companies, I know they tend to go where the money is. I've been to quite a few Southern U.S. states too, and they had little to no cloud cover while I was there. I guess the oil and nuclear propaganda machines are alive and well, when it comes down to money matters.

I think deeming facts to be propaganda and deeming wishes to be facts is one thing the solar industry and global warming deniers have in common.

As Chuck pointed out, the design of the reactor had not been watertight. If the generator room had been elevated [IE; not in the friggin' basement...you know, the first place that floods during a flood?] then the coolant systems would've worked as they were meant to and the meltdown would never have happened.

Yes. That's right. It was the placement of the backup generators that ultimately allowed the meltdowns to happen. That and TEPCO's selfish greed. Had they introduced seawater earlier, yes, it would have ruined the reactors but it also would have averted the entire fucking disaster.

Now, these reactors had been built in 1971. They were old as shit, and the design was a poor choice for that region. Pressurized water coolant systems would have been a better design choice, though they are a bit more temperamental.

Solar power DOES have potential but it's not something that's going to universally work. Some areas simply just don't have either enough sunlight or wind for either solar or wind powered plants. Nuclear power is a terrific stop-gap in areas that are not capable of grid parity with more sustainable methods, since modern reactors have tons of safety implements in them designed to prevent not just the Fukushima Number One reactor disaster from repeating itself but also things like a friggin' plane bulls-eyeing the reactor housing. Truth be told I think all nuclear power plants should have a small battery of AA weaponry with a no-fly zone implemented in an area around the reactor for just such an instance, but. That's just me.

Now I keep hearing figures where cost per megawatt hour is like $375 for solar power, compared to nuclear's $90, whereas I've also heard that you have to take wholesale and retail values into account and...fucking...so much other shit that I can't keep track of all the figures.

Long story short, right now, as it stands, nuclear energy is far more cost-effective. Solar power is coming into its own, but it's going to take time to reach a point where it is economical.

(November 24, 2012 at 12:22 pm)Ryantology Wrote: Solar is the future.

My ass it is.

Why take energy from the sun when you can recreate the reaction which actually powers the fucking thing.

IMO nuclear energy is the future.

Nuclear energy as it stands is uneconomic.

We have massive government subsidies just for it.

And China now is using US-designed LFTR technology because old Big Nuclear doesn't want it.

They'd rather use shitty BWRs from Gen II still.

But please, go on, tell me about how "Nuclear energy is the future".

Good nuclear is for China, but it seems that "Nuclear" to the average turnip on this forum is what they see on The Simpsons.

Lessons have clearly not been learned. Why am I not surprised? We're slowly irradiating our entire planet.

(November 24, 2012 at 12:22 pm)Ryantology Wrote: I favor nuclear above energy options which burn fossil fuels.

Switching over power stations reliant on fossil fuels for nuclear fission is akin to giving up smoking so you can take up crack instead.

Though I agree, solar power is the future, since we're not currently capable of tapping into nuclear fusion or zero point energy as it stands.