Who supports nuclear energy?

[WaltM]

From what I gathered :

John Birch Society
G Edward Griffin
Lyndon LaRouche

who else?

[libertybrewcity]

lots of people. i do.

[phill4paul]

Bill Gates. And he is investing in it.

The company is called TerraPower.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/02/17/bill.gates.nuclear/index.html


TerraPower is working to create nuclear reactors that generate hyper-fast nuclear reactions able to eat away at the dangerous nuclear waste.

This has a number of potential benefits, Gilleland said. Among them:

• The Uranium isotope that's food for the new nuclear reactors doesn't have to be enriched, which means it's less likely to be used in atomic weapons.

• The fission reaction in the new process burns through the nuclear waste slowly, which makes the process safer. One supply of spent uranium could burn for 60 years.

• The process creates a large amount of energy from relatively small amounts of uranium, which is important as global supplies run short.

• The process generates uranium that can be burned again to create "effectively an infinite fuel supply."

[YumYum]

We should have more nuclear power plants.

[Meatwasp]

I support them also

[james1906]

lolz @nucular

[Andrew Ryan]

I do.

[WaltM]

cool.

just making sure that between "green" liberals, "Tesla" conspiracists, and "patriot" coal-oil-steelers, I have some friends here.

[millard52english]

I do support in all way.....

[free1]

I support "nucular" fusion !

(not fission)

[wrestlingwes_8]

I support it for the time being. It''s a good source of energy until solar, wind, wave, and geothermal become cheaper and more readily available. This will all happen as the years go by. Nuclear, coal, oil and natural gas should all be obsolete in the next few decades. All of these engery sources are extremely dirty compared to the alternatives. If the technology exists there's no reason to use any of these dirty sources if we can get the prices of the alternatives down. I think the transition needs to be a gradual one though to make sure that the consumers aren't hit with increased energy prices.

[free1]

The Chevy Volt, the Nissan "Leaf", Ford Focus, and the new "Coda".


Standard will be a 8-year, 100,000 mile battery


Get yours today!

Coda:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20002436-54.html

[futo555]

I support the sun everyday! :eek:

[noxagol]

I support ending all government regulations and subsides and other involvements, and then letting the market decide which is best.

[charrob]

Nuclear, coal, oil and natural gas should all be obsolete in the next few decades.


and i remember the gas lines in the 1970's when everyone said: "within a few decades...." :p

But i agree with everything else you said... nuclear is a good option until the alternatives are cost effective, and they will be if we stop doing things like subsidizing the damned oil companies with our tax dollars.

[Seraphim]

I support ending all government regulations and subsides and other involvements, and then letting the market decide which is best.

I agree.

Although nuclear is high on the list for current energy sources, geothermal CRUSHES it.

Personally, if I was bestowed the task of choosing the general map of energy production it would look something like this:

Geothermal 60%
Ocean turbines, 10%
Solar 10%
oil/gas 5-10% (cars, with advanced hybrid/battery technology for great fuel efficiency)
Wind 5%
other 5-10%


Each area would be powered by what makes geographic sense.

Now this is built solely around the premise of building sustainable power so that regional conflicts over oil are less needed.

Larouche's main point for thermonuclear power is that he believes the world is being set up into two power factions that will war it out in WW3 (and I think he is right). He believes the "green" energies are foolish at this point in time because they cannot be weaponized to protect from attacks.

Remove the threat of total destruction war and Geothermal energy is probably the king of energy production.

[The Dude]

cool.

just making sure that between "green" liberals, "Tesla" conspiracists, and "patriot" coal-oil-steelers, I have some friends here.

What's a Nikola Tesla conspiracist?

[KCIndy]

The Chevy Volt, the Nissan "Leaf", Ford Focus, and the new "Coda".


Standard will be a 8-year, 100,000 mile battery


Get yours today!

Coda:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20002436-54.html


That's great... but the overarching question remains: By what means will we generate our electricity?

:)

[axiomata]

That seems like a very short and arbitrary list considering the majority of Americans plus everyone from the French to the North Koreans support it.

[Old Ducker]

I don't. Nuclear power plant owners are indemnified from accident liability by the Price Anderson Act.

[TruckinMike]

//

[axiomata]

I don't. Nuclear power plant owners are indemnified from accident liability by the Price Anderson Act.
So you don't like the Price Anderson Act. What do you think about nuclear energy?

[thehunter]

Nuclear power -- all for it. It is what all those wind and solar power projects should be. It'll never match oil or organic energy extraction in terms of efficiently, but it has an important part in our energy mix if we are to continue to progress as an economy.

[jsu718]

Generally the only people that support nuclear energy are those that have researched it. The rest buy into the hype of mutations and deformities and get giant wind turbines that kill the birds and the landscape instead.

[WaltM]

What's a Nikola Tesla conspiracist?

a person who believes Tesla had a magical way of gathering "free energy", allegedly unlimited, violating what we know currently about energy transmission, conservation of energy (probably similar to PPM), that'd put all energy production out of business, therefore, he was killed by people who wanted to sell energy to the world because his discovery was going to free people (and the elite can't have that).

[WaltM]

lolz @nucular

some smartass changed the title for me.

WIkipedia says edumacated people say it too.

[Old Ducker]

So you don't like the Price Anderson Act. What do you think about nuclear energy?

I don't have a problem with it. Other than Chernobyl (yes I know it wasnt a light water reactor), its safety record is pretty good. Im not sure that it's really all that economical though. We had a big reactor here, built in 1975 by PGE. It was supposed to have a 40 year lifespan but heat exchanger tubes began cracking after not much more than a decade of operation. My brother-in-law was a project manager there. In the mid-nineties it was shut down because of cracked tubes. Evidently it wasn't economical to replace the heat exchanger(s). The plant still exists as a ghost. PGE customers are still paying for it.

[silus]

I'm more of a fusion reactor type of guy.

[KCIndy]

I'm more of a fusion reactor type of guy.

Me too... But I just can't contain myself!! :D Sorry, bad physics joke!

[JustinTime]

I dont support or oppose any form of energy.

What I support is your right to produce energy from any source you can imagine, and everyone elses right to buy from you if your product is good, and the best and most efficient source will win out in the end.

No government subsidy.