Alternative power...

[stegmakk]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050622/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_nuclear_power;_ylt=AoTqdQH75gJWRsXVP_hz3jeyFz 4D;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
More Nuclear plants to be made?
Granted we need alternate power to oil...however...look in iceland...they are leaders in hydrogen tech...Nuke plants might not pollute the air but they create the WORST kind of pollutants...nuke waste...does anyone think long term anymore about hundreds of years in the future?

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050622/ap_on_sc/wisconsin_power_plant_3
Do we really want to revert back to big coal powerplants?
Look at the footprint this thing is estimated to have on the environment.

[LowRida]

I do not see any other way the US can help preserve it's fossil fuel other than nuclear power plants. Hopefully there has been an increase in precautionary measures sine Chenobyl. Also, the only reason Iceland is able to have hydrogen power is because of their hot springs beneth the ground, that's where their energy comes from.

[WHEELAX2]

Why not invest in "real" alternative sources of power.. rivers, wind, solar.. we have the technology, but no one seems to be willing to use it.... And don't tell me you can make more energy from nuclear power..

[Thrillhouse]

Why not invest in "real" alternative sources of power.. rivers, wind, solar.. we have the technology, but no one seems to be willing to use it.... And don't tell me you can make more energy from nuclear power..

The amount of enery created isn't the right question, it's how much money is spent compared to how much enery is created. Solar and wind is great for small communities that need to create thier own power, but it's too expensive to create the energy needed to power large populations. If it would work, I'd be all for it, but right now it isn't a real option.

What's left is fossil fuels which creates bad stuff that is released into the air; or nuclear power, which creates even worse stuff, but we can collect it.

Darned if you do, darned if you don't...

[zak]

I saw this very interesting thing on future techo n the history channel. There was a lot of stuff that had to do with like nanotechnology and strips under grass that cars would go on. It all saved energy and the environment.

One thing for hydrogen power, they used solar to genreate electricity to seperate the hydrogen molecule via electolysis for use in fuel cells. One stationary fuel cell at a house could refuel a car and pwoer the whole house. A totally natural, cost effecient way to produce nrg.

[Middie_Hero19]

Why not take the nuklear (sp?) waste on satalites/shuttles when they go up and release it into space? Maybe more money spent but prolly safer.

[GBaschski]

Why not take the nuklear (sp?) waste on satalites/shuttles when they go up and release it into space? Maybe more money spent but prolly safer.

Yeah, well what happens when we start polluting space, eh?

[zak]

Yeah, well what happens when we start polluting space, eh?


Boo hoo space is polluted... no one cares. We need to replace say, oregon with a big hole, and throw everything we dont want in there.

[stegmakk]

^had to edit that...don't need all the details...we get the point

[stegmakk]

Why not take the nuklear (sp?) waste on satalites/shuttles when they go up and release it into space? Maybe more money spent but prolly safer.
That'll be great until it plummets onto earth again...or explodes in space and sends a nice radioactive commet of debris into us :)

[twin58]

Why not ... release it into space [by way of the space shuttle]?

Launching stuff into space by way of the Space Shuttle is an expensive proposition. The Shuttle has a payload of 63,500 pounds, and the next launch should cost $1.3 billion. That puts the cost per pound at $20,500.

Wikipedia Space Shuttle program, technical data (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_shuttle#Technical_data)

Technical data
Maximum cargo to orbit: 28,800 kg (63,500 lb)

Wikipedia Space Shuttle program, costs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_shuttle#Costs)

Costs
While the shuttle has been a reasonably successful launch vehicle, it has been unable to meet its goal of radically reducing flight launch costs, as the average launch expenditures during its operations up to 2005 accumulates to $1.3 billion [1] (http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/space_policy/), a rather large figure compared to the initial projections of $10 to $20 million.

Wow, that's expensive. Back in the early 90s, the figure in use was $5000 per pound. Further, what happens in case of a launch mishap? Finally, do you place the stuff in orbit pending some future discovery that will allow the safe destruction of the nuclear byproduct? What if the waste material falls out of orbit? Or, do you just let it go out there forever?

[stegmakk]

Further, what happens in case of a launch mishap? Finally, do you place the stuff in orbit pending some future discovery that will allow the safe destruction of the nuclear byproduct? What if the waste material falls out of orbit? Or, do you just let it go out there forever?
good point...imagine the devastation...how many thousands of pounds of waste...we'd be potentially detonating a dirty bomb on ourselves

[zak]

Sorry, i was grumpy. Anyways, theres always the problem of launch dates, what happens when theres another hurricane over florida and we end up with a metric ton of nuclear waste sitting at the kennedey space center for 5 months?

Honestly though, couldnt we put it on some artificial island safehouse out in the middle of the pacific? It could be an international storage place for nuclear waste, that way everyone has a mutual interest in protecting it. I guess that would really harm the environment eitehr.

[Conrice]

theres lots of things that can be done....did anyone see modern marvels the other night? it was a special about fuel alternatives for cars/trucks....some guy was gettin 40mpg in his dodge duelly ram (truck with 4 back tires) from using old grease from mcdonalds...think about all of the semi's this country uses...those things get about 4-5mpg on diesel fuel


about the space thing, that wont be considered until we figure out how to make it more cost effective...enough said, also like many other ppl said, what about mishaps. i dont ever recall a mishap happening with burrying something a couple of miles underground (which is where nuclear waste is stored) but i recall a couple of recent problems with space shuttles

[Lampen69]

kk well i thin burrying waste underground cant be good, look at love canal. then hydrogen is a good idea...if someone can invent a way to remove oxygen from water..and making pure hydrogen..then we'd be set...or all of us could use nitrous oxide in our cars and go very fast...this would suck but...what about turning physical energy into chemical or however that flashlight that u can squeeze and it'll light up works...we could exploit mokeys ..wait cheetahs and they would make a crap load of energy in ...well nvm we could ride cheetahs. make everyone buy a aerodyne or w.e aand bike a few miles in place..again with the physical energy. maybe if a really awesome rock crashes into the planet and has a bunch of free hydrogen stuff..thatd be cool. jimalax should throw in free gas instead of mesh(jk). Another idea to try on for size is, go to the ghetto give everybody there a bike..then go to the gypsies give them bikes..then give a bike to everyone that doesnt have one..no one would steal peoples bikes anymore..at least in my city, and alot more people would ride bikes..(yeah right). take all suvs...melt them down and make fuel efficent cars with them..(applies for all gas guzzlers). make that guy on ebaums that can summon ufos..to get the alliens to bring better fuel..better yet, take our nuclear waste!..well im tired of being sarcastic..bye

[Lampen69]

They actually have flashlights that already do that. The only thing is that they use knobs that you turn in a circle to keep constant energy flowing. Pretty cool actually, just not effective cause your hand would get tired after about 5 minutes of use.

Its been awhile since I took chemistry, but I think that if you just removed the oxygen from water, you would be stuck with H2, which I think you would need to break down to H1 to have what you wanted.

um just to let u kno..hidden in my post i said something about that flashlight..believe it or not :OMG: .

[wrwarrior19]

Chenobyl was an isolated incident in the Ukraine in the mid 1980's caused by underprecautionary matters. Both then and now the US has much more strict measures.

[wrwarrior19]

Nuclear power has many benefits like cleanliness of plants; the amount of radioactive material necessary is actually very minute to create an enourmous amount of power; "A coal-fired power plant actually releases more radioactivity into the atmosphere than a properly functioning nuclear power plant. Coal-fired plants also release tons of carbon, sulfur and other elements into the atmosphere" (http://science.howstuffworks.com/nuclear-power6.htm).

This site describes the process and all that good stuff pretty well: http://science.howstuffworks.com/nuclear-power3.htm
http://science.howstuffworks.com/nuclear-power6.htm