Who still has faith in Nuclear?

[Atheist-Lite]

[Mysturji]

Nuclear power station
Glorified steam engine
Glorified highly radioactive steam engine
Glorified highly radioactive steam engine where the fire doesn't go out for 20,000 years
Glorified highly radioactive steam engine where the highly radioactive fire doesn't go out for 20,000 years
Glorified highly radioactive steam engine where the highly radioactive fire doesn't go out for 20,000 years even if the whole fucking thing blows up.

I'm not saying that nuclear power doesn't have it's place - it certainly does.
But IMHO, that place isn't on top of a major geological fault line, on a coastline that's prone to being hit by tsunamis.
Just sayin'

[FBM]

In general, it's not wise to put all your eggs in one basket, anyway. I voted for the mix with mostly alternatives.

I don't think there's a place in Japan safe unough from earthquakes and tsunamis to be a good location for the types of plants that they have now. Somebody may someday design a type that responds better to such disasters, though. I think I read where Japan's power is 30% nuclear sourced. Maybe they'll make a push for development of alternatives now.

[Rum]

When Chernobyl blew and the cloud was blowing over the UK I was sailing on a lake..in the rain! I half expected something horrible to happen to me for years after that!

The issue for me is that no matter how safe you make it, if a major accident happens it is really and truly nasty.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

When Chernobyl blew and the cloud was blowing over the UK I was sailing on a lake..in the rain! I half expected something horrible to happen to me for years after that!

And by looking at your avatar...

[Rum]

When Chernobyl blew and the cloud was blowing over the UK I was sailing on a lake..in the rain! I half expected something horrible to happen to me for years after that!

And by looking at your avatar...

[SPMaximus]

lots of generation 3+ nuclear reactors until fusion in 40-50 years please

[Atheist-Lite]

lots of generation 3+ nuclear reactors until fusion in 40-50 years please

I think 40-50 years is about right.....just like it was 40-50 years ago and will probably be in 40-50 years time.

[SPMaximus]

lots of generation 3+ nuclear reactors until fusion in 40-50 years please

I think 40-50 years is about right.....just like it was 40-50 years ago and will probably be in 40-50 years time.

thats fine, if fusion doesnt work out we will eventually get to generation 4 nuclear reactors

would be nice if we get to commercially viable fusion power in my lifetime though, technology has advanced quite a bit in the last 40-50 years and will keep going

[FBM]

When Chernobyl blew and the cloud was blowing over the UK I was sailing on a lake..in the rain! I half expected something horrible to happen to me for years after that!

And by looking at your avatar...

Not true, but funny nonetheless.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

My brother's family was in Germany then, in the fallout pattern. The Air Force brings them in each year for a thorough physical. So far they haven't detected any abnormal growths. (Which in my brother's case would be a brain.)

[amused]

I'm not saying that nuclear power doesn't have it's place - it certainly does.
But IMHO, that place isn't on top of a major geological fault line, on a coastline that's prone to being hit by tsunamis.
Just sayin'

^^ This

In retrospect, the location and the inadequacy of the power backups seems so inept given the risks involved. Little things, like maybe put the backup generators on the roof? And, only 8 hours of battery backup? Really? That's all they would afford given the enormous costs they will now face?

[Warren Dew]

I don't think there's a place in Japan safe unough from earthquakes and tsunamis to be a good location for the types of plants that they have now. Somebody may someday design a type that responds better to such disasters, though. I think I read where Japan's power is 30% nuclear sourced. Maybe they'll make a push for development of alternatives now.

There appear to be 3 reactors that are in trouble. That leaves 51 that are fine. I think an excellent argument can be made that most of the rectors in Japan can withstand a worst case earthquake and tsunami - because they have.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I don't think there's a place in Japan safe unough from earthquakes and tsunamis to be a good location for the types of plants that they have now. Somebody may someday design a type that responds better to such disasters, though. I think I read where Japan's power is 30% nuclear sourced. Maybe they'll make a push for development of alternatives now.

There appear to be 3 reactors that are in trouble. That leaves 51 that are fine. I think an excellent argument can be made that most of the rectors in Japan can withstand a worst case earthquake and tsunami - because they have.

Earthquake, 51 to 3
Tsunami ? to 3

How many reactors actually stood up to the earthquake? I doubt all of them had to.

[Warren Dew]

With respect to the poll question, one very important alternative has been left out: conservation.

After the oil shocks during peak U.S. production in the 1970s, the solution wasn't to build more power plants, either nuclear or alternatives. Rather, the solution was to make transportation, electric motors, lighting, and such more efficient, so we could do more with the power we had.

We can still go futher on that. I don't think we need more electrical generation, at least not in the near future. I think we need higher prices so people will have more incentive to choose more efficient alternatives.

Since that option wasn't available, though, I chose "the stone age".