Help | Contact Us
NukeWorker.com
NukeWorker Menu Environmentalist vs Nuclear Power

Author Topic: Environmentalist vs Nuclear Power  (Read 6083 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ShovelHeadRed

  • BIKER MCO IRHP
  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 180
  • Total likes: 2
  • Karma: 604
  • Gender: Male
  • ..Saddle up-the Victory is ours..
Environmentalist vs Nuclear Power
« on: Feb 28, 2007, 11:03 »
A letter to the editor in a widely read magazine stated that he was tired of hearing and reading that individuals calling themselves "environmentalists" were opposed to the use of nuclear power to generate electricity in the US.  The writer said that anyone who opposed nuclear power was in effect choosing brownouts and power failures and was an obvious anti-environmentalist since many people's lives depend on a relatively constant flow of electricity (hospitals, drug storage, food preservation).  The author concluded that of all the present energy method to supply mass power grids, nuclear power was the cleanest and safest means presently available in the US. "  The question we must answer is : Do you agree or disagree with this author's position?  Why or why not?  Areas such as alternate means of power generation, pollution factors-especially global warming, waste storage, possibility of accidents, and health concerns are all fair game for this.....
....OK Sportsfans..I know you have an opinion on this....red
"A government
big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take
everything you have.." Thomas Jefferson

"If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence.  If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel" - BB. (Benjamin Netanyahu)

.....Calling an illegal alien an 'undocumented immigrant' is like calling a drug dealer an 'unlicensed pharmacist'!!!!!!!!!!!!

Offline Marlin

  • Forum Staff
  • *
  • Posts: 10841
  • Total likes: 460
  • Karma: 5123
  • Gender: Male
  • Stop Global Whining!!!
Re: Environmentalist vs Nuclear Power
« Reply #1 on: Mar 01, 2007, 02:49 »
   Yes I do agree with the author. Looking at environmental impact over the fuel cycle of a power source it tends to favor nuclear power provided we solve the long term storage of high level waste. The dams on the Columbia generated very cheap power for a awhile but in the process destroyed a billion dollar salmon fishing industry. Wind power has a great promise but then what about the noise and physical threats over many acres to birds and other wildlife. Wind power seems better suited to small scale generation such as mansions in Tennessee  ;D .
   Self proclaimed environmentalists may be sincere but ill informed as it is difficult to buck the conventional wisdom of a movement in general. Some previously hard core environmentalists do favor nuclear power, even some who opposed it in the 70's and 80's ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/14/AR2006041401209_pf.html ). The anti nuclear attitude is not as prevalent as it once was, at least not from rational environmentalists. Whether it is politics or the environment we have a far left element that does not seem to think for itself. We need more leftists and environmentalists like Camella who do think for themselves and talk to us poor heathens that do not agree with them.
« Last Edit: Mar 01, 2007, 02:51 by Marlin »

Offline SloGlo

  • meter reader
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 5559
  • Total likes: 167
  • Karma: 2632
  • Gender: Male
  • trust me, i'm an hp
Re: Environmentalist vs Nuclear Power
« Reply #2 on: Mar 01, 2007, 09:46 »
The author concluded that of all the present energy method to supply mass power grids, nuclear power was the cleanest and safest means presently available in the US. "  The question we must answer is : Do you agree or disagree with this author's position?  Why or why not? 

are ya freeking serious?   do i agree that nukes are the cleanest 'n safest means presently availablein the us?  hail yes!  why?  cause my livelyhood depends on them?  cause i grew up breathing coal fired smog?  cause alla moving water is effectively dammed 'n put to use?  caws solar is available 1/2 da time ona good day?  caws wind power depends on whether da wind blows, 'n whether ted kennedy must look at it?  yes. yes. yes. yes. yes.
quando omni flunkus moritati

dubble eye, dubble yew, dubble aye!

dew the best ya kin, wit watt ya have, ware yinze are!

Charles U Farley

  • Guest
Re: Environmentalist vs Nuclear Power
« Reply #3 on: Mar 01, 2007, 11:31 »
are ya freeking serious?   do i agree that nukes are the cleanest 'n safest means presently availablein the us?  hail yes!  why?  cause my livelyhood depends on them?  cause i grew up breathing coal fired smog?  cause alla moving water is effectively dammed 'n put to use?  caws solar is available 1/2 da time ona good day?  caws wind power depends on whether da wind blows, 'n whether ted kennedy must look at it?  yes. yes. yes. yes. yes.

SloGlo, I like your posts, I really do.  But, dammit, you give me a headache trying to translate it to english.  After so many glasses of scotch, this time of night, I am having difficulties.  ;) 

Offline SloGlo

  • meter reader
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 5559
  • Total likes: 167
  • Karma: 2632
  • Gender: Male
  • trust me, i'm an hp
Re: Environmentalist vs Nuclear Power
« Reply #4 on: Mar 01, 2007, 11:34 »
SloGlo, I like your posts, I really do.  But, dammit, you give me a headache trying to translate it to english.  After so many glasses of scotch, this time of night, I am having difficulties.  ;) 

hay!  try reeding out lowd. 
« Last Edit: Mar 02, 2007, 12:17 by SloGlo »
quando omni flunkus moritati

dubble eye, dubble yew, dubble aye!

dew the best ya kin, wit watt ya have, ware yinze are!

Offline JessJen

Re: Environmentalist vs Nuclear Power
« Reply #5 on: Mar 02, 2007, 01:45 »
are ya freeking serious?   do i agree that nukes are the cleanest 'n safest means presently availablein the us?  hail yes!  why?  cause my livelyhood depends on them?  cause i grew up breathing coal fired smog?  cause alla moving water is effectively dammed 'n put to use?  caws solar is available 1/2 da time ona good day?  caws wind power depends on whether da wind blows, 'n whether ted kennedy must look at it?  yes. yes. yes. yes. yes.

Translation:Are you freaking serious? Do I agree that nukes are the cleanest and safest means available presently in the US?  He** Yes! Because my livelihood depends on them? Because I grew up breathing coal fired smog? Because all of the moving water is effectively dammed and put to use? Because solar power is only available half of the time on a good day? Because wind power depends on whether the wind blows, and whether Ted Kennedy must look at it? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes.

Offline SloGlo

  • meter reader
  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 5559
  • Total likes: 167
  • Karma: 2632
  • Gender: Male
  • trust me, i'm an hp
Re: Environmentalist vs Nuclear Power
« Reply #6 on: Mar 02, 2007, 09:41 »
Translation:

tanks!  coors, iffen sumbuddy is inta da scotch 'n trying to get ainglish, i feel fer der pain.  dey gotta half sacha internal conflict goan on!
quando omni flunkus moritati

dubble eye, dubble yew, dubble aye!

dew the best ya kin, wit watt ya have, ware yinze are!

 


NukeWorker ™ is a registered trademark of NukeWorker.com ™, LLC © 1996-2019 All rights reserved.
All material on this Web Site, including text, photographs, graphics, code and/or software, are protected by international copyright/trademark laws and treaties. Unauthorized use is not permitted. You may not modify, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit or distribute, in any manner, the material on this web site or any portion of it. Doing so will result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law.
Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Code of Conduct | Spam Policy | Advertising Info | Contact Us | Forum Rules | Password Problem?