Swedish nuclear reactors "unsafe"

eggy

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
5,283
Nothing new there.

Nuclear is not the answer!
 

Commandment

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Jun 25, 2004
Messages
973
man that would send the shits up me if i lived any where near them.
 

Lamp

Gold Star Holder!!
Joined
Jan 16, 2005
Messages
23,267
Commandment said:
man that would send the shits up me if i lived any where near them.

Radiation doesn't need a boat or plane. Atmospheric winds carry ionising radiation around the entire globe. No one's safe.
 

tris-

Failed Geordie and Parmothief
Joined
Jan 2, 2004
Messages
15,260
Commandment said:
man that would send the shits up me if i lived any where near them.

lol i wonder if you actually read the article. there is no danger posed to anyone.

although id like to pick up on not guaranteeing the safety. that doesnt actually mean they are unsafe ofc.
 

Vladamir

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
15,105
eggy said:
Nothing new there.

Nuclear is not the answer!

Where do you suggest we get the energy for ~6 billion people then once fossial fuels are used?.
 

Lamp

Gold Star Holder!!
Joined
Jan 16, 2005
Messages
23,267
tris- said:
lol i wonder if you actually read the article. there is no danger posed to anyone.

although id like to pick up on not guaranteeing the safety. that doesnt actually mean they are unsafe ofc.

Governments have been known to tell lies.
From time to time

:p
 

Rellik

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Feb 19, 2004
Messages
1,625
nuclear is the answer aslong as we don't have any other options that could work RIGHT NOW insted of nuclear power, but in time maybe..


But right now nuclear power is the answer even though it is unsafe
 

Darzil

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Jan 10, 2004
Messages
2,651
Vladamir said:
Where do you suggest we get the energy for ~6 billion people then once fossial fuels are used?.

From somewhere that isn't currently being consumed faster than it's being mined, and has less known deposits in the ground than coal. (Uranium)

Darzil
 

leviathane

Part of the furniture
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Messages
7,704
could always have nuclear pow stations under the sea xD so if they blow they only send a tidal wave round the world :)
 

tris-

Failed Geordie and Parmothief
Joined
Jan 2, 2004
Messages
15,260
people moan we are running out of fule, people moan when we try alternatives. same old same old :)

fact is everyone currently alive has no need to care about fossil fuels. they are going to last for the next 100 years at least.
 

Lamp

Gold Star Holder!!
Joined
Jan 16, 2005
Messages
23,267
Why don't we burn every convicted paedophile, rapist, murderer, and traffic warden for an alternative fuel source...
 

eggy

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
5,283
Vladamir said:
Where do you suggest we get the energy for ~6 billion people then once fossial fuels are used?.

It's not quite that simple.

The world currently produces around 75 million barrels of oil per day - global oil production will peak in around 2020 at around 90 million. By 2050 you're still looking at around 40 million barrels per day being produced.

Gas production on the other hand is in its infancy and will continue to rise to peak somewhere around 2040.

There is an awful lot of oil & gas reserves around; it's just getting to it that's the problem...but deepwater frontiers are getting more readily accessible and new reserves are being tapped all the time.

Renewables is a huge market too; for example, marine renewable energy capacity will increase more than ten times over the current figure by 2009. Renewables again isn't an answer, it's just another source (which has taken far too long to take off).

End of the day, if countries like China continue to use the amount of energy they do due to population growth...well, we're pretty fucked :)
 

tris-

Failed Geordie and Parmothief
Joined
Jan 2, 2004
Messages
15,260
more feesable way maybe to somehow extract the high percentage of water that human beings are made of, more painful too i reckon :D
 

Naetha

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
1,564
I have reasonably high confidence in nuclear power - when Chernobyl happened, more than 5000 deaths were predicted as being directly attributable to the event. Since then (20 years ago now) there have been 57 attributable deaths.

Low dose nuclear exposure isn't as bad as people make out (and this has been proved by scientific research as the well respected Horizon programme showed recently).

What people say about Uranium not being present in great enough quantities, I disagree with, as you need much less uranium than coal to produce electricity. Also Uranium isn't the only fuel, Thorium is being developed as a fuel for nuclear reactors as well.

Nuclear waste is an issue, but once people get over the NIMBYism and sensationalism and work things out by the actual risk rather than the perception of risk, then this should be solved relatively easily, although it will take time.

Maybe its because I work in the environmental sector and my company is heavily involved with both nuclear power production and nuclear waste disposal (from a planning and strategic point of view) that I have a much more scientific and reasonable opinion on things nuclear.

Incidentally, it is thought that the mining of coal and granite increases the nuclear radiation more so than the operation of a nuclear power station and its associated waste, by releasing radon and other natural radioactive gases into the environment.

I do believe that renewables are the way forwards, but these will take a while to develop, and aren't always efficient (metal fatigue in wind turbines, constant maintenance needed for photovoltaic cells, lack of wind etc), so until we have a reasonable and reliable system of renewable energy sources, nuclear will have to be our backup.
 

Tasslehoff

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
1,925
To add to Naetha's post, the reactors are much safer than back when the Chernobyl-thing happened.
Now they can withstand a plane hitting them from the outside (aswell as the inside) and the technology has evolved in the last 25 years :p so chances of something like that happening again are veeeery slim.
Actually, just look at how computers have evolved in the last 15 years, the reactors might not have evolved THAT much, but still just a tenth of the evoloution would be enough to make them a hell of a lot safer and better =)
 

tris-

Failed Geordie and Parmothief
Joined
Jan 2, 2004
Messages
15,260
i remember seeing a test video where they flew a jet plane into a 'sample' of the wall used on the reactors. the plane basically vapourised on impact.

then i seen a greenpeace video with CGI. where a passenger plane managed to go through the wall, somehow.

so with dicks like them spreading false info, im not suprised people are cautious about nuclear power
 

lilmissnaughty

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
802
tris- said:
more feesable way maybe to somehow extract the high percentage of water that human beings are made of, more painful too i reckon :D
heh u been watching tankgirl? :D
 

lilmissnaughty

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
802
Lamp said:
Why don't we burn every convicted paedophile, rapist, murderer, and traffic warden for an alternative fuel source...
lol i dont remember telling u my plans for when im fascist dictator of the whole world:D
 

leviathane

Part of the furniture
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Messages
7,704
china is using up copper faster than it's being mines, thts why 1p/2p coins are actually worth more than the'r current value :)
 

tris-

Failed Geordie and Parmothief
Joined
Jan 2, 2004
Messages
15,260
leviathane said:
china is using up copper faster than it's being mines, thts why 1p/2p coins are actually worth more than the'r current value :)

any source for this? afaik copper coins arnt 100% copper, just plated in it.
 

DocWolfe

Part of the furniture
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Messages
2,855
tris- said:
any source for this? afaik copper coins arnt 100% copper, just plated in it.

aye thats right tris-

1p Composition

Bronze 97% copper, 2.5% zinc, 0.5% tin (until September 1992)
Copper-plated steel (since September 1992)

2p Composition

Bronze 97% copper, 2.5% zinc, 0.5% tin (until September 1992)
Copper-plated steel (since September 1992 except in
1998 when the 2p was made in both alloys)

Even then I doubt it was 99.9% refined copper- the sort you need to make electronic devices out of.
 

eggy

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
5,283
Aye, copper has increased dramatically over the last 5 years:

spot-copper-5y-Large.gif
 

fettoken

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
9,640
leviathane said:
could always have nuclear pow stations under the sea xD so if they blow they only send a tidal wave round the world :)

Great idéa !!! Could start to mass produce them underwater :)
 

Bahumat

FH is my second home
Joined
Jun 22, 2004
Messages
16,788
I heard GOA are buying up all the Nuclear Reactors so they can run everything...im a little bit worries though
 

Amildin

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Feb 14, 2004
Messages
2,690
Samaroon|Terracotta said:
Would love to try getting to work, working at an underwater nuclear power plant :<

Commuting is a bitch :(
 

Chosen

Resident Freddy
Joined
Dec 29, 2003
Messages
2,615
Bahumat said:
I heard GOA are buying up all the Nuclear Reactors so they can run everything...im a little bit worries though

Yeah, everytime one blows up. They blame Mythic!

Mythic the worlds largest terrorist group!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom