Oil is BAD!

Oil is such a perfect storm of bad stuff, it is a testament to the power of the oil industry lobbysists that drastic action hasn't been taken yet.

The music is No More Gas, by DJ Earworm.

Enjoy!

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Oil
• global
• warming
• climate
• change
• spill
• gulf
• coast
• trade
• deficit
• terrorism
• environment
• energy
• efficiency
• gas
• prices

[1RadicalOne]

The former is valid, but the latter is not. The fuel is transported in heavily shielded and extremely reinforced containers. Have you seen the footage of the tests? These containers are dropped sixty stories, or hit by a freight train, and remain airtight.

[IceFire9yt]

@1RadicalOne

By risks, I meant the risks of nuclear wastes leaking during storage, as well as contamination of workers and the environments from the transport of fuel into the reactor and from dismantling the plants.

[1RadicalOne]

Risks? If you mean of meltdown, reactors are actually very safe.

The only times accidents have occurred have been from mistreatment and/or shoddy design. Both of those were responsible in Chernobyl, the "flagship" nuclear accident.

Have a look at Three-Mile Island. Despite a near-meltdown, the building performed wonderfully and noone was injured or killed.

[IceFire9yt]

@1RadicalOne

Yes you are correct. I originally had a source putting nuclear at around 17 cents per KWH, but more reliable sourced put it around 2.5 , while wind varies from 3 to 7 per KWH depending on location. I would like to point out that the cost of wind power is decreasing.

In any case, I think that the risks of Nuclear power outweigh its higher cost efficiency.

[cantares1]

Just dont import it..

You economy will _die_ without the massive import of oil..

Because oil is energy.. and without energy everything dies.

Laughable suggestion..

[1RadicalOne]

I am afraid you are entirely wrong.

A study in Australia found costs of 40-105 AUD per MWh for nuclear and 75 for HIGH-capacity wind.

As you might expect, the less efficient plants are the ones that are older or poorly designed.

[IceFire9yt]

@1RadicalOne

Wind power actually costs less per KWH than nuclear power. This is due for the very high cost of building the plant in the first place, higher maintnence costs, and costs for fuel.

[AnonEyeMouse]

Chavez isn't a dictator - he was elected.

[AnonEyeMouse]

@1RadicalOne

Actually with micro generation techniques we could switch to 100% Renewable power within a decade. With proper insulation, adoption of trickle-feed electronics, in home energy exchanging, solar panels and a next generation wind turbine like the QR5 the residential area could generate surplus electricity that can be fed back into the grid and the commercial and industrial demands could be fed from that plus large scale wind farms and coastal tidal generators.

[1RadicalOne]

Not always.

The reason fossil fuel plants are inefficient is not due to anything intrinsic to heat energy, but to the inefficient combustion of their fuels.

Nuclear fuels are far more efficient, often twice as efficient as fossil fuels.

Cost-wise, they are also more efficient than solar, wind, and tidal power.