Nuclear Power - A Solution To America's Energy Needs?

[cityimrov]

Building to withstand earthquakes are one thing, but you'll never get rid of human error & other natural disasters.

Anytime you have a machine that could potentially kill hundreds of thousands (if not millions with radiating them & then dying young from cancer later in life) if things go wrong, then its safe to say that it probably doesn't need to exist. Eventually things always go wrong. Common sense tells you that if there were more of these in the world (and in our own country), the likelihood of this happening here would go way way up. It would have probably happened by now if we had continued building them over the last decades.

I think you're living in the wrong area.  Though your not alone, there's quite a lot of people who think the same way.  

There's quite a lot of complex machinery nearby here that can literally kill us and cause major environmental damage that's probably equivalent to a nuclear blast.  As for complex machinery, to the north of us lies Kings Bay Submarine Base.  Inside each one of the submarines stationed in that base is a nuclear reactor.  One major typhoon (extremely rare but neither the less possible) and a submarine in the wrong place at the wrong time (also rare) will sweep the sub into land causing who knows what kind of damage.  Oh, and don't forget, that is the location of a large portion of our nuclear missiles.  Their safety record there isn't perfect either always prone to human error for devices which are purposely designed to actually produce massive amount of damage.  

Let's see, to the east of us is the Atlantic Ocean but before that is Mayport.  There, we're planning on bringing in a nuclear carrier with all the goodies it includes.  To the west of us lies just a good old fashion normal nuclear power plant.  To the south of us lies NASA.  One bit of human error there and the largest rockets known to mankind could come tumbling down into our city causing massive damage.  That isn't too bad compared to the rocket fuel they use there.  Stuff so deadly that it can instantly kill you if you come into contact.  Though not as bad as if you live in someplace called, well, New York City.

That city is near a state called New Jersey.  What's so special about New Jersey?  Chemical plants.  A whole lot of chemical plants which produce chemicals so deadly and so toxic it's like having a chemical weapon in the middle of the most populated city in the country.  Oh, the environmental effects could be quite deadly.  I'm pretty sure some of those chemicals are so deadly they can contaminate the drinking supply to the point that makes it impossible to live in that city for decades.  All you need is either human error, terrorism, or a natural disaster to cause this.

The point I'm trying to make is, unless you plan to move to the middle of Alaska, we're all surrounded by complex machinery that can literally kill us.  The thing is, for the most part, 99.9% of those machinery don't.  But even with that, accidents happen.  Could NYC be wiped off the map due to those chemical plants?  Yes, but that's the risk we take living in a modern society.  Look at coal, just by digging the thing causes major environmental disaster & human life.  If your town happens to be under a coal mine, it might be unlivable due to sink holes and disasters.  Natural gas?  Probably going to be as bad as wide spread drilling occurs.  One major human error and an entire population's drinking water supply will be contaminated.  Nuclear?  Well, instead of the "bad" parts of the power happening elsewhere, it happens near where the plant is build.

No matter what choice we make, a price will be paid and it's up to us as a society to decide who and where is going to pay the price.  At least when we import energy, the price is being paid by others.  In a way, we export misery for our power needs.  As we become more energy independent and more self-sufficient, we'll pay more of the price since well...that's what energy Independence pretty much means.  That is if we are willing to pay it.  

Remember,  there's always NIMBY.  Other countries are more than willing to pay that price for us should we give them truck loads of $$$.  All we have to do is keep covering our ears and our eyes to the gigantic environmental and sometimes human disasters those countries cause.  Yes, that includes Canada (look up "Oil Sands Environmental Cost/Disaster"). 

[thekillingwax]

I still think the scariest thing near us is the lost 1.5MT bomb off the coast of northern Ga. Initially they said it wasn't fully armed and that it had a lead nose but officials testified later that it was fully operational.

[simms3]

Stephen, I mention politics because liberals are often opposed to nuclear energy.  Many of the major environmental groups are also opposed (liberal environmental groups).  I was trying to amplify my point.  I actually testified in front of a committee on behalf of the general student body at Georgia Tech to have Plant Vogtle expanded.  I took polls of the mostly liberal student body for months and found that the overwhelming majority of students were in favor of expanding nuclear energy production in general and abandoning coal power as much as possible (abandoning coal did not surprise me in the least bit).  Most students at Tech at least start off in engineering (I did, for one), and anyone with any sort of scientific/engineering background can more easily see that nuclear/radiation/etc etc is nothing like what is portrayed in the media and in scare movies.

I think both political POVs are a bit off.  The conservatives overly tout coal, a very dangerous and disruptive and ecologically damaging source of energy, and the liberals vehemently oppose nuclear energy (fission and fusion development), a very clean, very safe, and very promising source of energy.

I really like cityimrov's comments, too, on the fact that we are surrounded by dangerous materials, dangerous machines, dangerous processes involving one or both of the above, dangerous people, dangerous everything.  We could all work out and eat right every day and stay as healthy as humanly possible and keel over due to some freak accident just about anywhere at any time (not only that, healthy people still die of freak natural causes...).

I do believe it was a small chemical manufacturing plant on the Northside that violently blew up just a few years ago and put up a large purple cloud, in addition to killing quite a few people.  The product was a gasoline additive that we put in our cars.

Heck, in today's world I would be more afraid of living near a meth manufacturer or a car crash or being struck by lightning than I would of a freak industrial accident (of course I don't work in any sort of plant).

And liquified natural gas is the new hot commodity on the NYMEX, especially after this Japanese incident, yet just in the past year we have had a couple of huge tragedies where gas mains ruptured and literally instantly blew up entire neighborhoods (killing many).  Not to mention the huge drinking water problem in parts of the Northeast due to fracking.  More people have died or been injured in this country from the relatively new LNG industry than the nuclear industry (in which off the top of my head I can't think of anyone who has died or been harmed).  We've had 6 decades of nuclear energy in this country, and you don't hear any trial lawyer commercials telling victims of nuclear plants to call their number.  All you hear about is asbestos/mesothelioma and every other supposed calamity.

[mtraininjax]

From CNBC earlier today....

Nuclear energy companies were lower Monday as Japan continued to struggle with its stricken nuclear reactor after a second hydrogen explosion rocked the facility.

Mad Money's Jim Cramer said on Monday's Stop Trading! That the earthquake had essentially put the nail in the coffin of nuclear power expansion in the United States.

"Is nuclear power dead in this country? Yes," Cramer said, adding that he believes no new nuclear reactors will be approved for a long time in the United States and decommissioning will likely be stepped up. But the most important thing to remember here is there is no incentive to build nuclear plants with politicians like Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., saying we need to pause, he added.

"There's no incentive to build these," he said. "This is going to be a natural gas country."

[thekillingwax]

Things aren't looking too good right now. If the latest explosion was in the suppression pool and it's damaged, there could be a containment leak. Some rumors coming from japanese press is that the drop in pressure and rod exposure possibly came from human error- something as simple as not keeping one of the diesel pumps fueled. That's unconfirmed though. What is glaringly obvious is that TEPCO cannot give a straight answer to any questions asked to them. Once recovery has started, I hope some heads will roll. It's just a sideline opinion but I think some things were handled very poorly from the start but everyone's just trying to do what they think is best during an absolute nightmare scenario- if the epicenter had been further south, I don't even want to think about what might've happened.

I'm certainly not the posterboy for nuclear energy and even I question the use of it in an area that is prone to so many forms of natural catastrophe, I think my main thing is that it shouldn't be written off entirely- there's no one single solution to our energy problem. Personally, I'd love to see more wind-based power but the cost is really high right now, solar is good too, as it evolves it may even reduce the need for toxic metals like mercury and lead for the cells.

[cityimrov]

This has more to do with how you view risk, not how you view politics.  Personally I hope that the problems associated with power generation will be solved by taking the majority of our industry offworld---along with most heavy mining and processing.

I like that idea. It seems like a nice way to keep most the earth in pristine condition was outsourcing our dirty stuff to an asteroid somewhere.  It's probably too late for us but not for our great great great grand kids. 

All we need to do is to invest into education and research for space, robotics, science, engineering, mathematics, etc.

[thekillingwax]

I've thought about this in the past but I think we're sooooo far off from anything like that- just imagine how destructive it would be if a ship carrying several hundred tons of highly radioactive toxic waste blew up in the upper atmosphere. Sure, you can put something in nearly-indestructible containers but as we're seeing with the current situation in Japan- sometimes nearly is not enough. I do like the idea of off-world robotic mining though- I don't think it'll happen in our time though.

[peestandingup]

Thank you thekillingwax!  I enjoyed reading that.  It's sad how much misinformation and scare hype there is about nuclear power.  Aside from Chernobyl, a Commie built crappy nuclear plant that blew because of human error, I can't think of any other incidents of people dying from nuclear power.

There are almost 500 nuclear power plants in the world, each with multiple reactors, and compared to any other major power source, nuclear energy is about as clean and safe as it gets, not to mention it is next to impossible to be any more efficient, especially with newer technology making used U-235 re-usable (from what I understand on a basic level).

The media is really succeeding at spreading enough misinformation about the disaster over there (especially having BILL NYE on of all people...I saw him during the day on another news site), it's no wonder people are freaked out.

peestandingup, I suggest you go back in time and review the human error safety record of modern day nuclear power in developed countries. Forget about Chernobyl, I wouldn't have expected in less from the Soviets.  Also, the plant to the north of Jacksonville is near Augusta.  I have been there.  They are adding two reactors.  It's called Plant Vogtle.  An 8.9 magnitude earthquake is not going to hit there, nor is a cat 5 hurricane (it's pretty far inland).  One of my best friends went to Georgia Tech undergrad Nuclear and Radiological Engineering (we call it NRE) and he's in grad school there now.  As liberal as he is, if he is not worried about nuclear power and is in fact pursuing a career in it, then I'm not worried.  He's been going out with another friend of mine for a couple years whose sister was the chief engineer at the Port St. Lucie plant and is now working for Duke Energy in Charlotte.  My friend and her sister come from a super lib family and they are big proponents for nuclear power.  I'm not worried; we are in good hands.

Tons tons tons more people die every year for coal power, LNG, etc.  Coal power is dangerous.  Mining coal is dangerous.  The power plants are even more likely to suffer a steam/pressure explosion (and that happens often compared to the two times in history now that it has happened with nuclear power).  Liquified Natural Gas is dangerous to extract, fracking is bad for the environment and bad for drinking water, and LNG is dangerous to transport and very dangerous to use to heat up in power plants.  Coal and LNG plants aren't built to nearly the same standards as nuclear plants and oddly nobody gives a rat's behind.

Simms.

What on earth are we to make about your comment regarding the politics of your friend from Georgia Tech?  Who cares if he is liberal or conservative?

What is the political angle you seem to be referring to?

For what its worth, the Nuke Rods are exposed to the air at the moment, so it looks like its worse than a few people have already predicted.

Switzerland has suspended all nuclear plant permits.

Yeah, don't you love when people try to turn everything into a political debate. "So your friend is a Liberal AND he's OK with nuclear power?!? Well, Jesus. Now I don't know what to think!" Let's not turn these topics into the talking points circus that network news channels are, guys. There's really nothing political about this.

The issue as I see it is potential destruction, and not anything to do with safety records & what has/hasn't happened in the past. Its a moot point. So the "if an airplane somewhere crashes, does that mean I'm terrified of airplanes now?" analogy someone wrote above is not even relevant, and frankly, kind of stupid. If an airplane crashes, it doesn't take the city (and possibly poison half of the country) in the process. And the poison airplane smoke also doesn't sweep across the jet stream & land into other islands/countries either (which IS a possibility from this current crisis, look it up), lasting for many many years.

My point is, these little nuclear devices & plants can have BIG impacts on the world & our surroundings. You just can't simply dismiss something like this, not with the awesome destructive force that nuclear is capable of. In the grand scheme of things, this science is still very much in its infancy & we shouldn't be messing with it unless absolutely necessary. Its incredibly careless & naive to think otherwise.

But hey, give it some time. Its been a while since people have experienced any type of major fallout first hand, all we have now are mostly black & white photos or old degraded video. I bet many proponents will change their tune as this thing progresses & we watch as people start dropping dead in masses, getting cancers, having their offspring mutated & their lands becoming inhabitable, all in HD.

[BridgeTroll]

My point is, these little nuclear devices & plants can have BIG impacts on the world & our surroundings. You just can't simply dismiss something like this, not with the awesome destructive force that nuclear is capable of. In the grand scheme of things, this science is still very much in its infancy & we shouldn't be messing with it unless absolutely necessary. Its incredibly careless & naive to think otherwise.

In light of what is going on it certainly is easy focus on its "enormous destructive force".  You seem to be doing so without acknowledging its enormous productive force.  When you say we are "careless and naive" to be "messing with" nuclear power what are you saying?  Just how does Japan generate electricity without it?  How about France and most of Europe?  I wonder how many and coal, oil and natural gas, power plants will have to be built to replace these nukes?

[peestandingup]

My point is, these little nuclear devices & plants can have BIG impacts on the world & our surroundings. You just can't simply dismiss something like this, not with the awesome destructive force that nuclear is capable of. In the grand scheme of things, this science is still very much in its infancy & we shouldn't be messing with it unless absolutely necessary. Its incredibly careless & naive to think otherwise.

In light of what is going on it certainly is easy focus on its "enormous destructive force".  You seem to be doing so without acknowledging its enormous productive force.  When you say we are "careless and naive" to be "messing with" nuclear power what are you saying?  Just how does Japan generate electricity without it?  How about France and most of Europe?  I wonder how many and coal, oil and natural gas, power plants will have to be built to replace these nukes?

It's only productive if it doesn't end up killing you in the end. How productive can a society be if half a dozen of their nuke plants ends up eating it, making big chunks of their land uninhabitable & poisoning a large amount of their population?

And it's not up to me to decide what's the best way to get power for these countries, as they're all different But I sure as hell know that in this day & age, we could certainly do better than using nukes to heat up water that spins turbines to generate electricity. You'd think an island like Japan would start investing in using hydro to make more electricity.

And look, if we as a people living on the planet can't keep up with our energy needs, then nothing's wrong with scaling back. That would certainly be better than dealing with giant underwater oil gushers & nuclear fallout, no? But not us apparently, we're doing the exact opposite & keep growing bigger & outwards. We gotta keep this train a movin'. Well, great. But just remember, nothing grows forever.

But like I said earlier, this is nothing we can't fix. We know how to live off the grid & live quite well. Look at Brad Pitt's New Orleans relief homes. Those damn things actually add TO the grid. And we know how to fix transportation too with battery technology & using your off the grid home as a charging station. So I'm not gonna sit here & buy this BS that we're all just forced to use these old resources.

Oh you're forced alright, but not for the reasons you think you are. And can all take that one to the bank. All of this stuff is so giant corporations can rule your world & get rich while doing it. If none of you see that, then I don't know what else to tell you.

[BridgeTroll]

So the answer is... scale back?  Live off the grid?

[thekillingwax]

Hydro isn't particularly green either- dams must be built. Look at Three Gorges- it's fairly efficient but it also destroyed 400 miles of beautiful, unique land that was covered in thousands of years of relics and archeological sites, it's all pretty much gone forever. Japan doesn't exactly have a lot of land to spare and if a mag 9 earthquake struck something like Three Gorges, I'm terrified to think of the repercussions. There are studies now that suggest that the dam is actually a big contributor to the recent quakes in china because it was built on a fault line.

Like I said, it's about balance- you can make .5GW solar/windfarms but no one would be able to afford it. I'd love it but I have trouble affording my utilities, as dirty as they are. I truly believe that one day we'll strike that right balance through fusion or something else but we have to do the best we can now. It's obvious that there are flaws in the design of the power plant in Japan- the older reactors are way too close to each other but at the same time you have to acknowledge that what happened there is pretty much some of the worst mother nature can throw at someone. Everything has risks and nuclear power is a scary idea- we're harnessing forces that few can comprehend but I think totally ruling it out because of what's going on right now is not the answer. Unfortunately, I think this is a rapidly shrinking line of thought.

As far as living scaled back? All for it, Brad Pitt come and make me a greenhouse! But consider how much of the grid we're using just posting on the internet- datacenters, end users and every step in between is consuming.

[Garden guy]

I've said it before and ill say it again...scientist around the world have proven that there is enough solar radiation to serve all of our needs...it's just up to us to study it and figure it out...oil and gas and coal are easy but dirty...we've got to get smart and as we can see...Nuclear is dangerous if something happens and can screw a big area up for a very long time.

[buckethead]

Energy is a dangerous business. You store vast amounts of energy in a single location and the opportunity for disaster is present.

Coal
Oil
Nukelar
Hydrogen
Solar (Don't go to the sun)
Wind (don't piss in the wind, especially a wind exceeding 100 knots)

Some are riskier than others.

Here's the A: NO

Q: Would you support a nuke you lar energy plant being built within a 5 mile radius of your home?

[peestandingup]

So the answer is... scale back?  Live off the grid?

All of the above & then some. People tend to want a single answer (coal? nuclear? wind? what do we use??), but it's gonna be a number of things we need to do & whatever works for your environment & application. And yes, its gonna take scaling back & rethinking things, even our entire cities (just look how bloody inefficient Jacksonville is. Just everyday functioning here is a huge waste of energy).

Like I said, we can do it, our technology is great. But its pretty clear a lot of this stuff is gonna have to start with everyday people just doing it themselves when it ultimately gets cheaper than old school energy methods (which is rapidly approaching). But obviously if we wait for corporations, city officials or big poppa government to do it, it'll never get done. It hasn't yet, and it could have way before now. They'll likely play politics & bicker for decades, all the while the special interest groups & lobbyists get their way again & again.

We have to remember that all we see, everything that surrounds us, was built around this old way of thinking & using old methods, assuming the likes of energy/oil/etc was just gonna stay dirt cheap forever & be easy to acquire. So we got real lazy & just kinda let it go on like this. And thats not just with our technology either. Hell, look what a mess Jacksonville has turned into. It used to be a great, condensed city with stellar public transit & walkable streets. We traded all that for this sprawling energy-hungry mess & cheaply built suburban crap that uses more energy to maintain.

Anyways, that's just one of the types of things I'm talking about. It's a whole host of problems that need addressed & nothing's gonna be a "catch all". Baby steps towards the ultimate goal, which is complete energy independence.