Bug Posted December 29, 2008 Share Posted December 29, 2008 We have limited funds so why bother with pushing for more dirty nuclear when we could use all of our money in cleaner, forever unlimited and ultimately cheaper sources of energy? Nuclear waste is about to seep into the Columbia. There is no way to clean it up in the forseeable future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradleym Posted December 29, 2008 Author Share Posted December 29, 2008 We have limited funds so why bother with pushing for more dirty nuclear when we could use all of our money in cleaner, forever unlimited and ultimately cheaper sources of energy? the problem, i believe, is in how do we get to there from here? wind and solar combined deliver less than 3% of our energy requirements right now. at current build rates and efficiency improvements and even with an expected Obama investment, i suspect that number may turn over to double digits in, say, 10 years. in the meantime, yes, we make every effort to reduce per capita consumption, but what fills in the gap until there is a solar panel on every rooftop and a wind turbine on every ridgeline? That is where the choices become increasingly hobsonian, as we trade off carbon output with nuclear waste and, yes, the lead, arsenic and selenium from coal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted December 29, 2008 Share Posted December 29, 2008 To be sure, I am not saying we should shut down existing nuclear capacity before we have adequate clean replacement but I don't understand how investing in more nuclear today won't take away from developping clean alternatives in nations that have unlimited solar potential (like the USA). Many types of solar plants are modular and require a fraction of the lead times demanded by new nuclear and coal power plants. Solar power technology is far from being optimized but it won't be for a while longer if we only make half-hearted attempts. Developping more nuclear today will commit us to another 40-60 years of nuclear plants in our environment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted December 29, 2008 Share Posted December 29, 2008 Nuclear waste is about to seep into the Columbia. There is no way to clean it up in the forseeable future. Hanford's waste came from the nuclear weapons program but it is nevertheless illustrative of our unability to make the problem go away as well as the cost of temporary fixes. Here is a short discussion of Hanford and the Columbia by the state of Oregon: http://www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/NUCSAF/HCleanup.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.