Hillary says OPEC can no longer be a cartel - Page 4

JaJae · 05-19-2008, 06:18 PM

Chernobyl would never happen in America. That was a failure of communism. Modern pepple reactors are very safe from what I understand. And yes, even coal plants in America are more dangerous than nuclear plants. There are a lot of accidents related to the machinery, gathering and transport.

Ardentfrost · 05-19-2008, 08:14 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

Chernobyl would never happen in America. That was a failure of communism. Modern pepple reactors are very safe from what I understand. And yes, even coal plants in America are more dangerous than nuclear plants. There are a lot of accidents related to the machinery, gathering and transport.

The new nuke plants are way safe. They have a lot of passive failsafes so human error is hardly even an possibility. I read that they're so safe, they don't even need the diesel generators for just in case they lose power to some of the subsystems anymore.

Look up AP1000. Those are the kinds of reactors we will now start building in America (now that we're going to be able to build again). They can build them in 36 months for a relative small amount of money because they can be mass produced and junk. Each reactor produces 1117 MWe. This is better than 2 coal plants at a fraction of the footprint and very low carbon emissions.

Of course, it's not like nuclear power is wasteless. There are the radioactive byproducts that have to be disposed of, but imo the benefits greatly outweigh the costs. And there'll always be towns like Barnwell, SC who is willing to take waste and store it (it's quite lucrative for that town).

Spideynw · 05-19-2008, 08:25 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

Chernobyl would never happen in America. That was a failure of communism. Modern pepple reactors are very safe from what I understand. And yes, even coal plants in America are more dangerous than nuclear plants. There are a lot of accidents related to the machinery, gathering and transport.

If the government took over the running of the plants, I guarantee you it would happen.

Spideynw · 05-19-2008, 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by Smull

But does anyone know how much of a difference this will make if we still drives cars that rely on gas? Like I said earlier it seems like we need 2 solutions to these problems, we can't drive nuclear cars, so don't we still need to find an alternative to gasoline in order to really solve the energy crisis? Again I'm genuinely curious here and would appreciate it if anybody has the answer.

What is the "problem"? Too many carbon emissions? This is not a problem. Or are you talking about energy? There are many solutions for the energy "crisis", all of them involving getting government out of the solution.

DosEquis · 05-19-2008, 08:45 PM

Originally Posted by Spideynw

If the government took over the running of the plants, I guarantee you it would happen.

The govt. obviously does a shitty job on a lot of things. It also runs a few things very well. Nuclear plants would not turn disasterous as the consequences are far to great for failure. The only thing that would happen if the govt took over these power plants, is they would pay $40 for a roll of paper towels instead of $4.00 for a 3 pack of paper towels to clean the bathrooms.

JaJae · 05-19-2008, 09:11 PM

Originally Posted by Spideynw

If the government took over the running of the plants, I guarantee you it would happen.

Not necessarily, Europe doesn't have Chernobyls.

Spideynw · 05-20-2008, 05:27 AM

Originally Posted by JaJae

Not necessarily, Europe doesn't have Chernobyls.

Well, I cannot really guarantee one would meltdown if the government ran it. But I can guarantee the private sector would do a much better job providing nuclear energy.

Kytro · 05-20-2008, 05:37 AM

Originally Posted by JaJae

Chernobyl would never happen in America. That was a failure of communism. Modern pepple reactors are very safe from what I understand. And yes, even coal plants in America are more dangerous than nuclear plants. There are a lot of accidents related to the machinery, gathering and transport.

Actually the faliure at Chernobyl was sheer incompetence

Ardentfrost · 05-20-2008, 06:58 AM

Originally Posted by Kytro

Actually the faliure at Chernobyl was sheer incompetence

Exacerbated by the iron curtain

Kytro · 05-20-2008, 07:19 AM

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

Exacerbated by the iron curtain

Well the polcies of the time hardly did much to help - but it was the corruption and hiring policies that caused the disaster.

Much less likely to have happen in the future due to better tech.

Ardentfrost · 05-20-2008, 07:19 AM

Originally Posted by Kytro

Well the polcies of the time hardly did much to help - but it was the corruption and hiring policies that caused the disaster.

Much less likely to have happen in the future due to better tech.

I agree. I meant post-meltdown.

JaJae · 05-20-2008, 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by Kytro

Well the polcies of the time hardly did much to help - but it was the corruption and hiring policies that caused the disaster.

Much less likely to have happen in the future due to better tech.

Well the tech's weren't properly trained, symptom of communism, but could happen elsewhere. However, that wouldn't have mattered so much if the nuclear reactor wasn't housed in an aluminum shed. THAT is why the meltdown was so disastrous and THAT was directly related to communism.