Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Uk Nuclear Power Watch

  • View Poll Results: Are you For or Against Nuclear Power in UK?
    Nuclear energy is our future, we should build more power stations
    136
    62.96%
    Toxic waste and Radiation are harming our enviroument, we should remove all Nuclear power plants
    11
    5.09%
    They can be used as a supplementary source of energy but we shouldn't relay on them
    69
    31.94%

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Nuclear fusion is indeed a must have in the future.
    A fully functioning nuclear power plant will cost britain 3.4 billion $. If we add costs of toxic reprocessing plants and running/maintaining the sum will skyrocket to 5.9-6 billion $.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    There was actually only one major incident on a nuclear power station in the UK. It happened in Suffolk some time ago 1980s ? There was a leak and the whole area was covered by a radiation cloud however the concetration wasn't dangerous.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kaosu_souzousha)
    Nuclear fusion is indeed a must have in the future.
    A fully functioning nuclear power plant will cost britain 3.4 billion $. If we add costs of toxic reprocessing plants and running/maintaining the sum will skyrocket to 5.9-6 billion $.
    Still cheaper than the true cost of wind over the lifetime. We need a balanced portfolio of energy sources so that a) we are not overly reliant on one source as this amplifies the problems with that source significantly or b) we have an supply system that is flexible and can match demand.

    Currently, wind is inflexible and intermittent, nuclear is just inflexible. Although the costs of building wind farms are less than nukes (although far off-shore wind ain't that cheap), operational costs for both significant and wind requires much more back-up from low-load factor gas, which is very expensive.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    25 more votes to 100! go go
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    A safe(if regulated), renewable energy alternative. I see that Nuclear power should be increased but not be a 100% source of reliance for energy. Some physics for you:
    Work is proportional to Power and Power is just Energy over time! I do love physics
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What about Thorium reactors? They seem to address many of the traditional concerns about nuclear power.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kaosu_souzousha)
    If some energy company were to build a Nuclear Power Plant next to your house how would you react?
    Actually, I wouldn't mind.. since reactors are so well housed that there is no noticable increase in radiation around a nuclear power plant than the usual background radiation.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I have e-mailed CND (campaign for nuclear disarmament) asking some questions about my research and they voted for option 2 =)
    (erase nuclear power plants from UK)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Did you know that there are 3 Nuclear power stations around London =O
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    France is taking advantage of nuclear power, so idk why we shouldn't.
    It's better then making weapons from it.
    They are much better then wind turbines too.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by No Man)
    France is taking advantage of nuclear power, so idk why we shouldn't.
    It's better then making weapons from it.
    They are much better then wind turbines too.
    The problem is that France owns the british nuclear sector. According to history UK nuclear industry was on the edge to become a bankrupt and EDF (energy de france) bought them.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Modern day nuclear powered stations are very safe, however, the problem is the waste generated and these wastes are dangerously radioactive. There are two types of radioactive waste 'low-level waste' (generally have a short half life - the time it takes for the number of nuclei of a radioactive source to reach 1/2 of its original value) and 'high level waste' (long half life - 10^6 or more years) - 'high level waste' are the ones that are difficult to decommission and cause the most headache. The benefits of nuclear generation far outweighs the risks IMO, but we shouldn't rely too much on nuclear powered stations, and instead, we should concentrate on advancing the present renewable energy sources and put lots of money into nuclear fusion research
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kaosu_souzousha)
    Did you know that there are 3 Nuclear power stations around London =O
    I'm not surprised, because London is powerhouse of England.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The problem is, is that whenever Nuclear power is mentioned the media go crazy and so do a lot of the public, because they automatically think Chernobyl and the like; these very few, rare events and panic all about it. Obviously, radiation and nuclear waste also play apart, but they cannot really say much if they drive a car, go on planes and boats, use plastics, which harm our environment just has much; not to mention that dispose dof carefully and securely, their effect on the environment is negligible.

    I too would love Nuclear fusion to become commericially viable. However, it seems to be getting pushed back all the time. My Physics teacher said that while he was in University.. some 30 or so years ago he was told that Nuclear fusion was 50 years away from being commericially viable. However, just recently he read an article that said Nuclear fusion was 50 years away from being commericially viable. But let's keep our hopes up though!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Well as fossil fuels run out, we will need to rely on it even more. Renewable energy is good, but provides no where near the amount of power we need.

    I don't mind so long as the plants and the nuclear material is kept secure and stored safely.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Nuclear fission should be a major component of any serious energy policy, but ultimately I think we have to find more from energy efficiency, microgeneration and employing wind and wave farms (preferably combined where feasible). For example - solar water heaters rely on proven technology, work very well in the UK compared to PV panels, and can drastically slash household energy budgets and gas consumption - they're relatively inexpensive as well. Why don't we start to roll these out with subsidies instead of useless PV panels? District heating is also a cheap efficiency method - new developments should be legally obliged to use district heating systems as opposed to wasteful individual boilers. The solution isn't just "BUILD NUCLEAR PLANTS", it needs to be much more complex than that if you don't want to become totally reliant on foreign uranium reserves instead of foreign oil reserves.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    We should build them then we can stop relying on other countries of fuel etc, yeah it might be a bit dangerous to the environment with the waste but we need to use this source of power until another method of energy is invented that is viable to supply the demand for the UK
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    bump
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I have nothing against nuclear power but i feel renewable energy would be a better long term method.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Nuclear power is the only way we'll be able to meet energy demands, unfortunately I'm all for it. I studied renewable sources of energy in some depth last year, and even from that limited research I realised the writing was on the wall - we will have to at least go partially nuclear at some point... unless you want to go back to the stone age that is
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.