being pro nuclear doesnt just mean you well known and sometimes loved fission power plants. if we can get nuclear fusion sorted we are set for the next few hundred years. but until then it looks like we dont have much alternative to building more fission reactors.
I'll take the risks of nuclear power over those massive intrusions on the landscape. Many of those turbines will be destroying scenic ridges and wilderness views. Not on a flat plain or generic farmland. And think of all the people stuck living around them with the noise and flashing lights.
None should be built in known earthquake or tsunami zones, which wouldn't seem to difficult to pull off.
@Antithropocentric ill take the risk of the "huuuge" damage that the wind turbines has on the landscape instead of the radiation what a nuclear power plant accident can cause.....
Birth control needs to be an integral part of any long-term energy plan. The idea of planning for even 9 billion people is not very intelligent. People don't have an innate "right" to overload natural systems. Too much of the growth we see has been built on finite oil and coal, with no guarantee that anything else can replace its scale.
Uranium is finite, by the way. Prone to peaking just like oil, coal and gas. Ramp up nuclear (fission) power and that will become self-evident.
Since the end of the cold war and the infamy of M.A.D. the general populous of the US has been terrified of nuclear power. I just wish they would see how much more efficient nuclear power is. It has the potential to save the land itself, reduce US dependance on foreign resources, and it would bring technical jobs to college graduates, freeing up low level jobs for everyone else.
I am not normal either!. I think we should make more use of Nuclear power. We buy enough of it off the French anyway, we may as well generate it in the UK, although it'll be EDF (hmmm, still french) who do it.
being pro nuclear doesnt just mean you well known and sometimes loved fission power plants. if we can get nuclear fusion sorted we are set for the next few hundred years. but until then it looks like we dont have much alternative to building more fission reactors.
CommanderMethos 1 month ago
from the states you given, it would ruffly take about 1000 wind powered machines to equal the nuclear.
You entirely misrepresent the amount by the windmills shown. There are at least 10,000 there compared to the 1000 required... FAIL
ThatGlitchingChannel 8 months ago
I'll take the risks of nuclear power over those massive intrusions on the landscape. Many of those turbines will be destroying scenic ridges and wilderness views. Not on a flat plain or generic farmland. And think of all the people stuck living around them with the noise and flashing lights.
None should be built in known earthquake or tsunami zones, which wouldn't seem to difficult to pull off.
Antithropocentric 8 months ago
@Antithropocentric ill take the risk of the "huuuge" damage that the wind turbines has on the landscape instead of the radiation what a nuclear power plant accident can cause.....
HedonistDaidalosz 7 months ago
Birth control needs to be an integral part of any long-term energy plan. The idea of planning for even 9 billion people is not very intelligent. People don't have an innate "right" to overload natural systems. Too much of the growth we see has been built on finite oil and coal, with no guarantee that anything else can replace its scale.
Uranium is finite, by the way. Prone to peaking just like oil, coal and gas. Ramp up nuclear (fission) power and that will become self-evident.
Antithropocentric 8 months ago
Since the end of the cold war and the infamy of M.A.D. the general populous of the US has been terrified of nuclear power. I just wish they would see how much more efficient nuclear power is. It has the potential to save the land itself, reduce US dependance on foreign resources, and it would bring technical jobs to college graduates, freeing up low level jobs for everyone else.
Jarvisx51 1 year ago
I am not normal either!. I think we should make more use of Nuclear power. We buy enough of it off the French anyway, we may as well generate it in the UK, although it'll be EDF (hmmm, still french) who do it.
TheGraemeEvans 1 year ago