Washington Fly Fishing Forum banner

NFR---Nuclear Power

2K views 40 replies 17 participants last post by  bennysbuddy 
#1 ·
For those of you who may have an interest in nuclear power from the stand point of an ANTI Nuclear Green Peacer who later became an advocate, see the following youtube link:

 
#4 ·
I think I've read that despite significant improvements in energy conservation, total energy use per capita in increasing in the U.S. Favoring a reduction in use and achieving it aren't the same thing. And energy use per capita is rapidly increasing in other parts of the world, where people also want to enjoy the affluent lifestyles that Americans enjoy. I'm not a nuclear power fan, but if people will not decrease consumption, then what are you going to actually do, beyond providing conservation minded lip service?

Sg
 
#5 ·
I'm not a nuclear power fan, but if people will not decrease consumption, then what are you going to actually do, beyond providing conservation minded lip service?
Reduce population.
(Please don't ask me how..:D)

I see energy, water & food security and pollution as smaller side issues to population.
 
#8 ·
I agree totally. You can't have any kids unless you can spell genes right. ;-)

Regarding the video, I think nuclear power is a great option for power generation (especially the new reactor designs). Having worked with radioactive isotopes for research purposes I don't fear them but certainly respect them. Let's hope new high power generating technologies are developed in the coming decades to replace coal and hydro. Solar and wind will never fill this gap.
 
#10 ·
DimeBrite, posted on my dumb ass phone.
plaegreid. If by "wicked class warfare" you mean the poor couldn't have kids, tough shit. If you can't afford to raise them, you can't have them. Sounds harsh I know. Why is it people think they can do whatever they want without responsibility for those actions?
As for the rest of your post, I've held that same idea for years. How about people who want more than two can buy a child credit. I'll sell mine.
 
#11 ·
the poor couldn't have kids, tough shit. If you can't afford to raise them, you can't have them. Sounds harsh I know.
Certainly radical thinking is required and any real solution will be hard work to get past the PC crowd.
:eek:

My own thinking, and it's harsh, is that the developed world has to stop intervening in third world problems so heavily.
If you can't feed all your people mother nature is telling you something.
Maybe more foreign aid could be in the form of family planning ?

For the west ( and I'm a hypocrite first class in this respect) a limit on the number of children is a good first step.
Economics should be the carrot and the stick.
Have one child pay less tax, have 8 pay much more.

In both the third and developed world I would suggest paying people to have the snip - it fair- and would save money in the long run.

Like I said though, I have 3 kids and can't really get on a soap box about the issue, but IMHO it's very much time for the world to take it on and at least start the conversation.
The economic hurtles alone are epic before you even get to the moral ones.
 
#15 ·
Educated, empowered women equal smaller family sizes every single time. It ain't about money, it's about education and moving past cultural conservatism regarding sex roles.

Move along now, this one just got settled.

Go Sox,
cds
that is incorrect. education is not the answer. it does not make people smarter and it does not make them do the right thing.

the only thing that changes the world is when people are motivated to do the right thing. People are naturally motivated to do the wrong thing so that only a significant event or revalation changes them from that path.

An example catch and release fishing has not always been popular. 70 years ago is was downright unheard of. However a revelation happened and people realized that you can catch a fish more than one time and since that revelation catch and release is the driving force behind almost ever top notch fishery on the planet. That did not come about through education it came about because people chose to do the right thing and it caught on.

women are now required to work outside the home to make a families ends meet, that enslavement not empowerment. we need to get back to cultural conservatism. not necessarily what is now considered political conservatism. We are already WAY beyond cultural conservatism...

back to power generation.. we need to reduce demand
 
#16 ·
It's been shown over and over throughout the world. Whenever women get educated and move away from more conservative cultural values (regardless of culture) birth rates drop. Every fucking time. It's truly not debatable.

Educate women in Northern Africa, free them from muslim or tribal conervatism = less kids.

On a more close to home level. My mom was a practicing Catholic ( culturally conservative). 4 kids.

Her 4 kids are all atheists. 1.5 kids per. Every fucking time.

Go Sox,
cds
 
G
#18 ·
OP.... That is a great film. I was more than a little intrigued with the story line which you rightly describe as a number of hard core environmentalists who have had a change of heart regarding nuclear power. The film also does a great job explaining the different types of nuclear reactors and why there was a rush to build the less safe version. We now have the technology to build truly safe reactors...but alas, no political will to do so.

With regard to the sentiments about population control I have a simple question and then a proposition.

The question- Whom shall choose those of us worthy of reproduction?

The proposition- If you believe the world is presently overpopulated and it is such a moral conundrum, maybe you should volunteer to jump overboard? ;)
 
#19 ·
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/97facts/edu2birt.htm
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/9/education-level-inversely-related-to-childbearing/
http://www.eubios.info/EJ124/ej124i.htm

Really neat one here: http://www.reproductive-health-journal.com/content/6/1/14

This one really pounds the point home too: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2723861/

I suppose I could go on but it gets redundant.

I am hopeful that we will not have to think about deciding who can or can't reproduce because culture may just get us there. I remember reading in Freakonomics how a study in India, I believe, showed that women with access to Television had lower birth rates. Every step towards modernity and against the old ways leads to lower birth rates. Tehnology may be the best defense against overpopulation.

Go Sox,
cds
 
#20 ·
charles what happens when your wife is brilliant and smoking hot? just to further the ass hatness, how did your siblings get the .5 kid?

lower consumption most likely is not going to happen, look around and literally see the ratchet-up impact us everyday.
 
#22 ·
Funny you should ask Jersey, my wife happens to be quite fine IMO and quite brilliant (although her tenacity may be her best trait). We have 2 kids and will have no more. So with an N=1 in my study that will lead to her reproducing at less than replacement rate. Not statistically signifigant but neither was the horseradish thought behind Mr. Allen telling me I was incorrect.

Now on to the 1.5. My mother has 6 grandkids and 4 children. That is an average of 1.5 grandchildren per child. Although she roughly doubled replacement, none of her children have gotten to replacement levels and given our ages it is unlikely any will. All 4 went to college (education) with 3 graduating and 1 has her masters (2 children).

Go Sox,
cds
 
#23 ·
Charles is correct, empower women and family size declines. I actually like the idea of no tax credit after 2 kids.

Nuclear reactors are cost prohibitive ( with external costs beyond our lifetime). How about mandatory solar panels on any new structure and tax incentives for retro-fits. Distributive power generation is the future. Oh wait, that will cut into peoples profits, we can't do that.
 
#26 ·
Charles is correct, empower women and family size declines. I actually like the idea of no tax credit after 2 kids.

Nuclear reactors are cost prohibitive ( with external costs beyond our lifetime). How about mandatory solar panels on any new structure and tax incentives for retro-fits. Distributive power generation is the future. Oh wait, that will cut into peoples profits, we can't do that.
Bang! I think you nailed it on both counts. Nuclear is prohibitively expensive.

Lately I've been thinking about this distributed power concept. What if building regulations required every new house to produce power via wind, solar, geothermal, etc. In a world (as defined in this bizarre thread) where government controls your reproductive system, this should be acceptable.
 
#27 ·
people should reproduce as they see fit
people should use less power or generate their own.
they should drive vehicles that fit their lifestyle ( if you don't tow you don't need an f 350)

It's all about personal responsibility...
Nuclear power is irresponsible..

nuclear waste has a half life about 10,000 times longer than any government has been on the planet. therefore no government can keep those wastes safe and secure because no government will be around long enough to do so.


how that for a shotgun blast of rant???
 
#33 ·
people should reproduce as they see fit
people should use less power or generate their own.
they should drive vehicles that fit their lifestyle ( if you don't tow you don't need an f 350)

It's all about personal responsibility...
Nuclear power is irresponsible..

nuclear waste has a half life about 10,000 times longer than any government has been on the planet. therefore no government can keep those wastes safe and secure because no government will be around long enough to do so.

how that for a shotgun blast of rant???
PS fundamentalist christian 0 reproduction...
 
#29 ·
One more thing to consider, Japan is closing their nuclear plants ( because of Fukashima), and building hybrid generation plants that burn coal or natural gas.
 
#31 ·
Currently Natural gas is the quickest source of new power (also most economical) and certainly much cleaner than coal. Japan however is not closing all of their nuclear power plants. Some certainly will not be able to restart and a couple of others should not be although they could.

Bottom line is they got tired of not having AC during the summer and natural gas was the quickest way to get the needed power.
 
#35 ·
Essentailly you get a tax credit, that is really a rebate from the feds for 25-30% of the cost. From that point forward you will recieve enough selling power back to the grid to collect more than you borrowed on your rediculously low interest loan. Contact a solar dealer in your area. They'll be happy to show you.

I have recently been discussing this with a very succesful and thoughtful spec builder who would love to put solar on his homes. He has made them "solar ready" but that did not sell the home. He feels like it would be a great selling point if he could get banks to factor in the financial advantage for the prospective buyer/ borrower. Unfortunately, the added upfront costs have made the homes more expensive then other similar homes and most bankers are unable to grasp the concept that a solar home will generate money. They understand nice kitchens and decks but solar just does not compute.

Banks....single handedly setting the US back.

Go Sox,
cds
 
#36 ·
There was a program here for a while where one of the big power companies (Gas) combined with government to offer a full solar set-up for your house with 0% finance and no little or no deposit thanks to the rebate.
(I think final cost was 3 to 6 K)
Excess power was sold back to the power company via credit on your bill.
This was hugely successful because of the extremely high cost of electricity here and lots of people took it up.
Then the government drastically cut the re-sell price and lowered the rebate and everyone stopped doing it.
surprise surprise surprise. :rolleyes:
 
#39 ·
Old, very old joke.
Guy walks in the neighborhood barber shop, sits down in the chair for his haircut and the barber says "well Rufus what do want to talk about today"?
Rufus:, Oh, I don't know, how about lets talk about about nuclear energy.
Barber: Wait a minute. Before we get started on nuclear power, answer me this.
A cow eats grass in the field, and shits a big sloppy cow paddy, right?
Rufus: Right.
Barber: Then a horse eats the same grass outa that field and shits these hairy round balls, ok?
Rufus: Yeah, well
Barber: Now along comes a rabbit, eats the same grass, outa the same field, and yet he shits a bunch of these little bitty round turds. Now why is that?
Rufus: DamifIknow
Barber: See there Rufus, you don't know shit, and you want to talk about nuclear energy!

I thought this thread was about nuclear energy, not reproduction rights. If you want to rant about the latter, how about starting a new thread?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top