Shhhh...don't talk about infrastructure....that costs money....talking about investing in our own country makes Republican baby Jesus cry.
Shhhh...don't talk about infrastructure....that costs money....talking about investing in our own country makes Republican baby Jesus cry.
tekkychick (07-16-2013)
Hey, not our fault you hate cheap, clean, safe and most importantly AMERICAN energy.
WATERMARK, GREATEST OF THE TRINITY, ON CHIK-FIL-A
www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com
www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com
Yeah....real clean....when one out if every 20 fracking wells fail as soon as they are first used and poisoning water supplies...and that doesn't include the ones that fail over time.
Regardless of your Strawman..... our grid operates at 40% efficiency. That means 60% of the electricity generated is lost in heat dissipation and transmission. This is unacceptable... who do you think pays for this gross inefficiency?
WATERMARK, GREATEST OF THE TRINITY, ON CHIK-FIL-A
www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com
www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com
Steelplate (07-17-2013)
Resuse the fuel rods. France and other MODERN nuclear nations do. It reduces waste exponentially. As for the ineffiencies, it's due mostly to the AGE of our power grid (nuclear included). If we replaced 50% of our coal and oil power plants (the oldest, and therefore least efficent and dirtiest of the bunch) with new nuclear power plants, we would have a cleaner environment, a HUGE upsurge in skilled paying jobs (which will also serve as a teaching pool for future generations), be much more energy independant, reduced green house emissions (not something I particularly care about), and ultimately cheaper power for everyone involved. There is essentially NO downside to this.
WATERMARK, GREATEST OF THE TRINITY, ON CHIK-FIL-A
www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com
www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com
cancel2 2022 (07-17-2013), Steelplate (07-17-2013)
This is has been covered several times by me, obviously you were out to lunch. They are not spent fuel rods as up to 97% of the rod is still uranium. You need to tell the loony treehuggers to go fuck themselves and build some reprocessing plants such as the one we have at Sellafield and/or open an underground disposal facility at somewhere like Yucca mountain.
/MSG/ (07-17-2013), Steelplate (07-17-2013)
Must not have caught that...I haven't been on this forum all that long....in general....I depart from many of.my fellow libs on nukes.
I don't on renewables though. I still think Hydrogen is the way to go for our vehicular needs. I even have an idea to make it happen.
One of the biggest challenges to Hydrogen technology is in the manufacturing process. It takes more energy to.produce hydrogen than the.energy it creates. You've seen those solar arrays over in the middle east that power entire cities? Put one in the Mojave...and the only thing it would be used for is the production of Hydrogen have it open to any current oil company to get in on the action. Let "we the people" build the array....they build the electrolysis plants.
That would give them free power....minus periodic charges for upkeep of the array....all they would have to do is built the plants and staff it.
But we still have to tackle the gross inefficiencies of our grid.
How many have died from radiation at Fukushima?
http://asiancorrespondent.com/53036/...ma-death-toll/
You have inadvertently hit upon the reason why wind power will never be viable, it can only work effectively if you have a US wide grid costing several trillions. Look at the example of Germany and learn from their mistakes.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9...to-the-UK.html
/MSG/ (07-17-2013)
Bookmarks