Nuclear Energy; Competition To Oil ?

Discussion in 'News, Current Events, and Politics' started by Pragmatist, Jul 4, 2019.

0/5, 0 votes

  1. Pragmatist

    Pragmatist Expert Member
      190/230

    Blog Posts:
    0
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  2. Morgan101

    Morgan101 Master Survivalist
      335/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I have been a proponent of Nuclear Energy for a very long time. It is much maligned, and people are terrified to even speak the word nuclear because of ignorance. The only thing they know is we used it to bomb Japan, so it must be bad. I have worked in both industries, Nuclear, and Renewables. My vote goes to Nuclear. This is a good video from an environmentalist with a changed mind.

     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  3. lonewolf

    lonewolf Moderator Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I hate nuclear, both energy and missiles. cleaning up after Nuclear waste costs a fortune.and its all still lethally active for hundreds if not thousands of years.
     
  4. Morgan101

    Morgan101 Master Survivalist
      335/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    We could debate this until the cows come home. Nothing is without risk. Nothing is without cost. Many of the renewables do more harm than good to the environment, and they are just as expensive to clean up or dispose of.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  5. lonewolf

    lonewolf Moderator Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I don't believe that last remark for a moment.
     
    TMT Tactical and coffee like this.
  6. Pragmatist

    Pragmatist Expert Member
      190/230

    Blog Posts:
    0
    One of the firsshowt acts of office as new POTUS, LBJ mothballed the prototype civilian nuclear-powered vessel N.S. Savannah. I am guessing there was a reason for his action.

    Lone Wolf; the cost comparison - the "all in" - all inclusive - costs shows that Middle East oil/gas and cold area oil/gas - is no bargain basement purchase compared to the military establishments and baby-sitting the tribes with flags plus the other Arab fascists.

    Now there is indeed a cost for disposal-storage for spent nuclear fuel rods, emergency preparedness for incidents and related. These costs are really chargeable to the electricity user. This is real environmental concerns. No longer would someone with a residential electricity account live in a cool comfort zone that they cannot afford or not willing to pay for their personal comfort.

    Perhaps the world's largest concentration of nuclear power plants is south of me: the USN vessels with nuclear propulsion. These power plans are public sector so my comment here is that there are not spiked cancer rates on the charts.
     
    TMT Tactical and Morgan101 like this.
  7. Morgan101

    Morgan101 Master Survivalist
      335/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    You don't have to. Nothing lasts forever. Solar panels have a useful life; then they have to be replaced. Solar panels have significant amounts of Cadmium and lead in them. The panels are not worth recycling because the cost to recycle is more than the materials are worth. Plus, the Cadmium and Lead are leaching into the ground from rainwater the entire time they are being used. Now a used solar panel complete with its Cadmium and Lead have to be disposed. Under any other circumstances Cadmium and Lead would be considered toxic substances, and would have to be handled accordingly. This doesn't even begin to address the replacement costs when panels are damaged by natural disasters.

    Have you ever heard of Neodymium? It is a rare earth metal used in batteries, a large portion of which goes into Wind turbines. Google it sometime, and see what the Chinese have done to their environment by mining it. I would feel safe to say that nobody in the free world would allow that environmental desecration to occur. It's China. Nobody gives a $%^t what they do to the environment, especially their own.

    Everything has a cost. some are just a well guarded secret.
     
    poltiregist and TMT Tactical like this.
  8. lonewolf

    lonewolf Moderator Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    yes I know everything has a cost but I cant believe it costs as much to dispose of a solar panel or a wind turbine than it does to dispose of nuclear waste which is still lethal for centuries.
    personally I have no use for nuclear, oil or renewables, I don't care if the world goes dark-in fact I look forward to it.
     
    TMT Tactical and Morgan101 like this.
  9. Morgan101

    Morgan101 Master Survivalist
      335/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    We might also add that around the world nuclear energy is used as a primary source. France uses 72% nuclear; Ukraine 55%; Hungary 50%; Belgium 50%; Sweden 40%.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  10. lonewolf

    lonewolf Moderator Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    dosent make it right, just expedient.
     
    TMT Tactical and coffee like this.
  11. Morgan101

    Morgan101 Master Survivalist
      335/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Certainly, your prerogative.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  12. lonewolf

    lonewolf Moderator Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    yep, i'm kinda old fashioned!! and one of a kind!:p
     
    TMT Tactical, coffee and Morgan101 like this.
  13. Morgan101

    Morgan101 Master Survivalist
      335/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Aren't we all. We still love you.
     
    TMT Tactical and lonewolf like this.
  14. lonewolf

    lonewolf Moderator Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    thank you for that. a lot of people don't understand where i'm coming from.
     
    TMT Tactical, coffee and Morgan101 like this.
  15. Morgan101

    Morgan101 Master Survivalist
      335/345

    Blog Posts:
    0
    You are quite welcome, and I mean that sincerely. I hate for you and I to pirate this thread, and turn it into a personal debate, but I think it is a great example of how two people can be polar opposites on an issue, and still discuss it intelligently, and maybe just agree to disagree. Shake hands and part friends.

    I would like to have more of these.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  16. lonewolf

    lonewolf Moderator Staff Member
      510/575

    Blog Posts:
    0
    I have no problem with someone who has a different point of view, its trolls I dislike, those that call me names just because I think differently.
     
  17. watcherchris

    watcherchris Master Survivalist
      380/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    The Nuclear vs Oil debate is a hoax.....a scam..

    There is no Oil Shortage and never has been. The goal is to control oil as is controlled Diamonds..to keep up the price.

    This has been going on for which I know since WW1.

    The problem in Vietnam was discovering and developing the oil under the guise of a war.....and when the oil was discovered and wells sunk....plotted...etc...the wells were capped off and the war wound down. The whole country was turned over to the Communists.....not for the oil..but to keep the oil off the marketplace. Communist are horrible at running anything for a profit.....anything...they are too stupid...without outside help..

    At what Communists are excellent is keeping a country in storage..isolated....resources of the marketplace and at the same time ....and very very important....keeping competitors out.

    And so they were used in Vietnam to this day to keep the oil off the marketplace.
    This in like manner to how the Alaskan oil was sent anywhere but to the United States...to keep prices up ...by regulating supply.

    There is not and never has been a "Oil Shortage." Oil Shortages are man made manipulations ...man made shortages.

    The Shah of Iran made just such an statement about there being no Oil shortage in the 1970s and shortly after that he was overthrown and a radical Islamist put into office over that country.

    Nuclear power only helps to fill the gap in a man made oil shortage..


    The nature of this Hoax........


    Active Volcanos spew more pollution than all the vehicles and power plants combined...

    And remember what is going on in and around this world in the ring of fire.

    You decide for yourself if you want to be reeled in after the hook is set in you .....again.



    The only long term solution to man made Global Warming or Climate change.....by design..is to reduce the world's population.....by Genocide or Democide.....this is the actual long term UN solution to their man made crisis.


    They don't dare tell you this...

    All you have to do is think outside the "Herding " going on.



    Read line One of the Georgia Guidestones and think for your self....not with the Herd.

    This is the long term United Nations goal for the whole earth...no matter what they try to tell you.



    the Guidestones..

    1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
    2. Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.
    3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
    4. Rule passion — faith — tradition — and all things with tempered reason.
    5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
    6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
    7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
    8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
    9. Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
    10. Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature

    This is the United Nation "Herding" goal for every nation and people.

    Nothing about Rights at law...limits on government..."Limited Government."




    Pollution, climate change...oil consumption...coal consumption...nuclear and other...energy issues are part and parcel of their herding modus operandi.


    Be warned....

    There is no oil shortage...and never has been. The problem is how to maintain oil and energy in the minds of people to be in short supply ...and the price of this commodity up ...to herd people and nations/governments economically.
    Ishmaelites at work....doing what Ishmaelites do.


    My non Ishmaelite .02,

    Watcherchris
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  18. watcherchris

    watcherchris Master Survivalist
      380/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Remember this..as an aside to what I am saying about there being no
    "Oil or Energy Shortage"...all of this being man made...artificial.


    Remember what we did in Vietnam...in addition to developing the Oil fields and then capping them off.


    What we did was bring the Vietnamese economy into the 20th century at taxpayer expence..in critical areas of infrastructure...

    The Vietnamese went from riding bicycles motor scooters and rickshaws......and am radios...to cars, televisions, and swimming pools...along with a huge huge black market in everything.....by the time we left.

    This is but a tell tale of the economy being brought into the 20th century at taxpayer expense under the guise of war.


    Think this is nuts.........

    We did the same thing in Iraq...under the guise of war....brought the economy into the 21st century standards at taxpayer expense .....while developing critical infrastructure to support the resources.....much of which is being kept off the marketplace...so as to not let prices drop too far.

    Remember...America is now verily energy independent.....not dependent on Arab Sources...

    Europe...not so!!


    So.....what are we doing in Afghanistan...resource wise????

    My non Ishmaelite .02,
    Watcherchris
     
    poltiregist and TMT Tactical like this.
  19. Pragmatist

    Pragmatist Expert Member
      190/230

    Blog Posts:
    0
    http://webdoc.sub.gwdg.de/ebook/p/2005/CMH_2/www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/vietnam/logistic/chapter3.htm


    Good afternoon Watcherchris,

    Had just read above and it reminded me of a book titled "Fueling the War" by a Dutch manager, based in Singapore (I vaguely recall) who was SEA manager for one of the major oil companies. My book is long lost.

    Could not find a web reference to it but ran into above.

    At [72] "Petroleum Support" note references to "Shell, Esso, Caltex".

    At [74] note "to Singapore area ... ... to avoid Saudi Arabian taxes".

    Besides oil, don't forget the rubber trees. I once walked through the original Michelin rubber plantation.

    Am guessing that "(Asiatic Petroleum)" was a charity.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  20. Keith H.

    Keith H. Moderator Staff Member
      525/575

    Blog Posts:
    7
    No mate, we know a lot more than that. We have seen the results of nuclear power station catastrophes such as Fukushima & others, & as far as I am concerned nuclear power is simply not worth the risk. To say nothing of having to store the waste!!!
    vpw56DFJlSxCxFzmJzAO2JJ6mMP5VnlO.gif
    Keith.
     
    lonewolf likes this.
  21. Old Geezer

    Old Geezer Master Survivalist
      410/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Let's say we have a dozen mega-SHTF events over the next one thousand years. Eventually this world will get its act together. Over the next few centuries, most useless people (have genetic issues with stupidity or lazyness and/or incapable of being moral and/or can't get along with other people) are going to be killed off or will simply die-off.

    We WILL end up high tech. There Will be billions of people. Energy needs will be enormous. Wind and solar will NEVER meet more than 10% of that need.

    There are other types of nuclear reactors other than breeder reactors. Thorium reactors are one such example (does not have plutonium waste). Whatever, one way or another we will duplicate on Earth the energy-producing capability of our sun. We will find ways to generate mind-numbing amounts of energy.

    https://whatisnuclear.com/thorium.html

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium-based_nuclear_power
     
    poltiregist and TMT Tactical like this.
  22. GrizzlyetteAdams

    GrizzlyetteAdams Crap Creek Survivor
      340/345

    Blog Posts:
    3
    Last week, I learned how small the footprint of nuclear energy can be (hattip to Morgan 101). For example, he pointed out that "Switzerland gets 47% of its energy from nuclear reactors. All of the waste that Switzerland has produced since the inception (50-70 years ago) you could put in a high school gymnasium."

    Chernobyl and Fukushima gave nuclear energy a bad name. He also pointed out that Chernobyl was an explosion; not a nuclear reaction. Fukushima should never have been built where it was. The Japanese should have known it was susceptible. Some say they did know, and built it anyway.

    Knowing how Russia is famous for cutting corners, I am not surprised that the Chernobyl event occurred because of "a flawed reactor design that was operated with inadequately trained personnel." (http://www.world-nuclear.org/inform...rity/safety-of-plants/chernobyl-accident.aspx)

    As a result, these two footprints were much, much larger than it should have been.

    There needs to be a global accounting and standards for operating nuclear energy plants! If the UN wants to be useful for something, there's their sign...


    .
     
    TMT Tactical and Old Geezer like this.
  23. Pragmatist

    Pragmatist Expert Member
      190/230

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Good morning Keith,

    There are definitely risks in re nuclear power plants. These risks are still less than dealing with Middle East oil acquisition.

    Recall during Gulf War I, when Iraq threatened to launch missiles with poison gas at Saudi Arabia. An "unofficial" spokesman for Israel announced: "If the Iraqis use gas, Baghdad will be left as a pile of radioactive rubble".

    Now compare storage of spend nuclear fuel rods in Nevada - forgot the location - to a Middle East flareup that goes "critical mass".

    True, nuclear power plants have risks. Yet, Fukushima was built on a fault line and much of the disaster was not nuclear-driven. Tokyo Electric Power Company cut some regulation corners. Just follow the money.
     
    Morgan101 and TMT Tactical like this.
  24. F22 Simpilot

    F22 Simpilot Expert Member
      135/173

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Nuclear power is indeed a good clean source of energy pertaining to the fact it doesn't create pollution in the air like fossil fuels do. And new generation nuke plants are even safer than the very old plants we have today in the U.S. Also, you can reprocess spent fuel and in fact France does just that so your waste is very minimal.

    The thing with nuclear though is that the plant its self has to be designed with the utmost in safety comparable to that of the Apollo moon missions. For example. With Fukushima, the backup generators that kept the cooling pumps going were at ground level and so when the flood rolled in they were destroyed. So with that mistake now known we need to build any and all possible future nuke plants that reside near the sea to have their backup generators set high above the ground so that catastrophe doesn't happen again. I may also be inclined to add roof mounted solar cells to be a backup power source for the cooling pumps as well. When I do things I like multiple redundancy and that mantra should be incorporated into any future nuke plants that are built. On the other hand I would not build a nuke plant in earthquake prone areas for the obvious reasons.

    Now here in the U.S. we are the world's number one producer of natural gas and I'm quite fond of this possible new energy source. Not only is it plentiful, but it's cheap and is also half as pollutant as other fossil fuels. So with that you could create natural gas driven power plants in lieu of a very expensive nuke plant and the very expensive reprocessing that would have to be done to lessen the amount of nuclear waste.

    I also think an NG-powered hybrid vehicle is the way of the future. Again, not only is natural gas less pollutant but if used in a hybrid engine configuration your pollutants are pretty nil. All this talk about battery operated cars makes me just shake my head. All that energy has to come from mostly coal-driven power plants. So where are you ahead in terms of "greenage?"
     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2019
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  25. F22 Simpilot

    F22 Simpilot Expert Member
      135/173

    Blog Posts:
    0

    Yucca Mountain. The most geologically studied mountain on earth. But despite that and all the planing, etc, the politicians have a "not in my backyard" mentality about permanent storage there. So because of this crybaby attitude all of the spent fuel is kept on site at the nuke plant which is of course not very ideal at all. One day we are either gonna have to store it in Yucca Mountain or reprocess the stuff.
     
    TMT Tactical likes this.
  26. F22 Simpilot

    F22 Simpilot Expert Member
      135/173

    Blog Posts:
    0

    That's like asking the government not to tax and spend to oblivion.
     
  27. Pragmatist

    Pragmatist Expert Member
      190/230

    Blog Posts:
    0
    Good morning F-22,

    Now I remember: Yucca Mountain.

    Thank you.
     
  28. watcherchris

    watcherchris Master Survivalist
      380/460

    Blog Posts:
    0
    GrizzlyeteAdam and others,

    There is a video out detailing what happened not only at Chernobyl but also at Three Mile Island and details a slightly different account of what happened in Russia...in that the people doing the test were not in coordination with the people operating the reactor ...they were working at cross purposes with each other.

    Chernobyl is a BWR or older design boiling water reactor..with a graphite core. These are no longer being built. Today the designs are Pressurized Water Reactors..PWR.....and also built within a safety enclosure...or containment design.

    I think it will be some time before a video comes out to the general public detailing what happened at Fukashima.

    Agree with what the French are doing in reprocessing their spent nuclear fuel...and not keeping it laying about...

    This is not done in America because of some pre positioned regulation that the spent fuel here in America must needs be kept In water pools on site. I agree that this is a disaster waiting to happen. Really stupid....the kind of thing Ishmaelites do.


    For those of you here in America who do not know and or have never been told...
    America has had it's own Fukashima, and or Chernobyl...way back in early 1961 out in Idaho.

    This is so seldom told to Americans nor brought up in the news or history channel etc etc.
    There is a confidential video out on the details of what happened but only shown in authorized circles.
    Certain of the details of what happened there and back then are still confidential to this day.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SL-1

    What helped America back then is that this was an experimental reactor and located far from any city out in the isolated Idaho desert.
    This whole site has today been dismantled and the ground plowed over.


    Yucca Mountain needs to be opened and also our spent fuel needs to be reprocessed and not kept in water pools on site.


    Watcherchris
    Not an Ishmaelite
     
    Last edited: Jul 6, 2019
Loading...

Share This Page