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:
    bump
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    What do you think are the Conservative's policies regarding nuclear power?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    bump
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Fusion Power please.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Out of the effects of nuclear waste and fossil fuels, I pick nuclear as the least risky. That's why I think it should be used as a transition fuel, as we get off fossil fuels and develop other methods of producing energy. And at the moment, there is no way we'll have enough energy produced for the country's needs without one or the other (fossil fuels/nuclear).
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Why is Scotland against nuclear power?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    bump
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Nuclear fission vs Wind farms?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Building solar panel fields in the desert?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    These are the facts:

    A handful of uranium contains more energy than 100 boxcars full of coal.

    Consumption of energy creates more energy, not less.

    Despite years of government subsidies (regulators, for instance, have forced utility companies to buy "renewables"), these same renewables generate only about 0.9 percent of our total electricity.

    The most efficient solar panels currently in use (on the space station) are costly, and their conversion efficiency is about twenty percent, which is not very much.

    Twelve miles of solar reflectors generate about 300 megawatts, a miniscule amount. Furthermore, those reflectors must be kept squeaky clean, maintained to the hilt, or they won't work.

    At our current level of technology, no conceivable mix of solar, wind, or wave can meet even half the demand for energy.

    All of you NEED to read this article http://mises.org/daily/3536

    NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Obscenedilemma)
    These are the facts:

    A handful of uranium contains more energy than 100 boxcars full of coal.

    Consumption of energy creates more energy, not less.

    Despite years of government subsidies (regulators, for instance, have forced utility companies to buy "renewables"), these same renewables generate only about 0.9 percent of our total electricity.

    The most efficient solar panels currently in use (on the space station) are costly, and their conversion efficiency is about twenty percent, which is not very much.

    Twelve miles of solar reflectors generate about 300 megawatts, a miniscule amount. Furthermore, those reflectors must be kept squeaky clean, maintained to the hilt, or they won't work.

    At our current level of technology, no conceivable mix of solar, wind, or wave can meet even half the demand for energy.

    All of you NEED to read this article http://mises.org/daily/3536

    NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED
    Thank you for your post, it will help me with my EPQ
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I'm against nuclear energy on the basis that we would be completely and irrevocably ****ed if chernobyl were to happen here. I accept that the risk is minimal, but I'm not willing to take it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kaosu_souzousha)
    What do you think about Nuclear Energy and its future in Britain?


    - Most of british nuclear industry is controlled by EDF (energy de france)
    - Major problems with nuclear fuel is that we could only use 3% of it and rest goes to dumps
    - 4th generation of powerplants will increase it to about 12%
    - Toxic waste reprocessing plants are doing a good job recycling the waste so that only a fraction has to be contained
    - People who live near Nuclear Plants are exposed to some radiation but this yearly amount is equivalent to one flight in the plane.
    - When Nuclear Power plant is running its almost carbon neutral
    Electricité de France .

    I'm absoulutly for it as it will make more money for my country. Actually radiation are worth if you live over granite than "near" a nuclear power plant.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Manitude)
    Ideally we'd be on nuclear fusion as that will be a very inexpensive way of producing more energy than our civilisation could use in a million years or so.
    Until then, fission is safe and efficient, the waste is a small problem but not as bad as the results of burning fossil fuels.
    Incidents like Chernobyl don't happen when properly trained safety officers are working there.
    Ni teivos aissur raelcun noqaew kcatta uoy.

    :cool:
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Stratos)
    Ni teivos aissur raelcun noqaew kcatta uoy.

    :cool:
    lol, took me a few minutes to work out what you meant there :P
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Manitude)
    lol, took me a few minutes to work out what you meant there :P
    You may have soviet blood in you.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Stratos)
    You may have soviet blood in you.
    :pierre: I think not.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'm all for nuclear power though I think the govt should still be investing in offshore wind etc as well so we have several sources of low carbon energy and can be less reliant on fossil fuels. But in terms of the most viable source of energy for the long term I think nuclear is the way forward.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LysFromParis)
    Electricité de France .

    I'm absoulutly for it as it will make more money for my country. Actually radiation are worth if you live over granite than "near" a nuclear power plant.
    Thank you for clarifying the name . Did you know that they are building a 500 MW nuclear fusion prototype reactor in France? The first research based one is in Oxfordshire and only generates 16MW.

    P.S. radiation is awesome (alpha, beta, gamma ... so much good stuff)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kaosu_souzousha)
    Thank you for clarifying the name . Did you know that they are building a 500 MW nuclear fusion prototype reactor in France? The first research based one is in Oxfordshire and only generates 16MW.

    P.S. radiation is awesome (alpha, beta, gamma ... so much good stuff)
    Yes, ITER in Cadarache (in the nice south of France). They are supposed to deliver a working prototype in 2025 and industrial reactor for 2050. Fusion create no pollution and it will be one of the greatest achievement of humanity.

    Wind are solar could not be use over a certain per cent, you need a constant and reliable source of electricity which sun or wind are not (especially for the sun in UK ^^). Even using Nuclear Power plant you need to keep Gaz or fuel power plant to be able to react to consumption pick.

    Regarding the PS, of course nuclear power plant carry some danger, but modern power plant and waste treatment make as minimal as it is possible, and it's pretty unlikely than those power plant explode, Chernobyl was based on a different technology and the power plant was poorly maintained.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

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

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