nukes

[AMD]

*No need for debate/arguments/whatever you want to call it, the poll will suffice*

***THIS IS A PUBLIC POLL

[smirnoff]

Lets see out of all the nuclear accidents in the world we have had more then any other country, up tell now we have gotten luck tell now and avioded major crap.

Add this to the fact we use the old cando reactors which have been outdated by 30 years instead of the newer neutron flow reactors which are hugely more safe.

If its done right its safe but we always go with the lowest bidder instead of the best.

on the bright side you don't need a night light when your glowing.

[Thaiwoo]

Lets see out of all the nuclear accidents in the world we have had more then any other country, up tell now we have gotten luck tell now and avioded major crap.

Care to provide a link to backup your statement?

Candu reactors might not be the newest but they do not need enriched fuel. They can also be refueled while online which allows them to run 500, 600 or more days at full power while the "conventional" reactors have to be shut down and refueled. If they keep running any longer their power output drops.

I would say that most of the reactors out there are outdated as far a design goes. The world is scared or Nuclear Power and therefore no one will want to invest any money into newer designs.

We can all thank Three Mile Island for that.

Eventually we will have to build new ones.

[T_Totler]

I'm not against nuclear power per se, but the reason I voted "no" is simply that I'm not convinced that a foolproof method has been developed yet to dispose of the radioactive waste that nuclear power generates.

[phoenen]

I originally polled NO becuase we should be thinking of conservation instead of building more nuclear plants. If we can conserve energy and build more safer alternative plants like Natural Gas, than it would be much better than building more Nuclear plants.

phoenen

[Thaiwoo]

Agreed, conservation is one thing, but you're going to need new productions as well.

With rising Natural gas prices I don't think it is going to be economical for base load power production. When there's a high demand like early in the morning or over lunch the natural gas plants are still going to be needed for quick peak power.

Nuclear is and will be the way to go.

Another thing is educating the people. Most people do not have a clue what it takes to produce electricity. Everybody should go and spend a day in a power plant (nuke or coal fired) and see what all is involved. Maybe they would consider to conserve more energy.

[Dr.Dan]

First and formost, conservation.

As for nuclear power plants, yes, it can be a good source of energy production... but we need to look forward into OTHER / BETTER / CLEAN ways to produce our energy.

Wind?
Solar?
Something we haven't even thought of yet??

[Mouse]

Photosynthesis. ;)

[Nave]

I wont rely on somthing that doesnt exist to power our reliance on electricity. For now Reactors can be built more efficiently than the CANDU reactors were and it will be cheaper to maintain them because we have seen what doesnt work. I think another nuclear reactor is the best bet for now, Just to suffice then let the unkowns become known and stable...

[smirnoff]

Care to provide a link to backup your statement?

Candu reactors might not be the newest but they do not need enriched fuel. They can also be refueled while online which allows them to run 500, 600 or more days at full power while the "conventional" reactors have to be shut down and refueled. If they keep running any longer their power output drops.

I would say that most of the reactors out there are outdated as far a design goes. The world is scared or Nuclear Power and therefore no one will want to invest any money into newer designs.

We can all thank Three Mile Island for that.

Eventually we will have to build new ones.

http://www.ccnr.org/chernobyl_in_canada.html



List of the major accidents to date.

Chalk River experimental reactor (Canada) 1952
A partial meltdown of reactor's urananium fuel core... World's first major nuclear reactor disaster

Chalk River experimental reactor (Canada) 1958 - an irradiated fuel element broke off and caught fire after being removed from the reactor. 600 men (mostly Canadian and American soldiers) were involved in the clean-up of the radioactive contamination.

Windscale Pile No. 1, (England) 1957
fire in a reactor spewed radiation over the countryside, contaminating a 200-square-mile area

Three Mile Island nuclear power plant (USA) 1979:
Partial core meltdown of uranium core. Radioactive water and gases were released.

Pickering A, Canada (August 1, 1983):
a pressure tube in Pickering Reactor #2 had a one-metre rupture due to embrittlement, dumping coolant into the reactor building.

Chernobyl nuclear power plant, Ukraine (1986):
Explosion in core of one reactor: released radioactive material that spread over part of the Soviet Union, eastern Europe, Scandinavia, and later western Europe. Total casualties are unknown. Worst civilian nuclear accident to date. Prior to Cherobyl, the nuclear industry had claimed that the chances of a serious accident occurring at a nuclear power plant was no more than one in a million "reactor years". That claim is now seen as false.

Bruce, Canada (January 1990):
a computer problem caused a Loss of Coolant Accident resulting in a 12-tonne leak of heavy water from a fuelling machine on Bruce Reactor #4.

Pickering A, Canada - In August 1992, a tube-break in the moderator heat exchanger on Pickering Reactor #1 dumped 3,000 litres of radiation-contaminated heavy water into Lake Ontario. It was the largest tritium release in CANDU history, causing the shutdown of a nearby water supply plant.

Pickering A, Canada (December 10, 1994):
the site of Canada’s worst accident at a commercial nuclear station. A pipe break resulted in a major loss of coolant accident and a spill of 185 tonnes of heavy water. For the first time in CANDU history, the Emergency Coolant Injection System was used to avoid a melt-down.

Pickering, Canada (November 22, 1988). An operator error damaged 36 fuel bundles. The cooling system was contaminated by radioactive iodine that was vented into the environment over several weeks following the accident.

Bruce, Canada (May 1995):
a valve failure caused a 25-tonne leak of radioactive heavy water at Bruce Reactor #5

Tokaimura, Japan (1999)
high levels of radioactive gas released into the air: Japan's worst nuclear accident


Liquid neutron can kill a chain reaction in 2 sec but Pickering "A" was made before this just like Chernobyl was.

[Andromeda]

Originally posted by MouseMeat
Photosynthesis.;)

All for that option....I take it you have the formula:htv: to transition into a plant?

[Mouse]

If I know that answer we would be having this conversation. ;)

[Andromeda]

Rats, I always fancied being a monkey puzzle tree :( ;)

[Taz]

First and formost, conservation.

As for nuclear power plants, yes, it can be a good source of energy production... but we need to look forward into OTHER / BETTER / CLEAN ways to produce our energy.

Wind?
Solar?
Something we haven't even thought of yet??

Wind is excellent, I drive the Wind Farm in Port Burwell everyday, the 66 turbines are to produce enough power for 33,000 homes. Besides power they give the farmers in the area some extra income from the land lease. Solar I think is the best idea I think that every home should have a solar panel on the roof to help power their needs. Of course $$ is an issue but I think the benefit would far outwiegh the cost.

My wife seen something on Cityline about a solrpanel that you can have installed on your house, as it "collects" power it physically turns back your meter thus saving you money. This is one I'd love to find out more about.

[Dr.Dan]

My wife seen something on Cityline about a solrpanel that you can have installed on your house, as it "collects" power it physically turns back your meter thus saving you money. This is one I'd love to find out more about.
Yep, anything that you're not using goes back into the grid and feeds others... and hydro 'pays' you for it (which is actually subtracting from what you use from them).

But the other way is to have your own collection system... but that's allot of money and maintenance... batteries and AC to DC and DC to AC converters.

I know a guy that has a place that is totally 'off the grid' and has all this stuff... it's a big investment, but he feels it's worth it. :rrg:

[Mouse]

Ohhh, it's not nice to fool Mother Government.

If enough people took themselves off of the grid, MG would surly find a way to tax their asses.

[BillD]

My understanding of the CANDU reactor is that you can't have a meltdown, like at 3 Mile Island, or Chernobyl. If the heavy water is removed the reaction stops, or so I was told by an engineer a number of years ago. from what I can see of all the accidents reported above (Canadian ones), only one resulted in environmental damage, unlike the coal fired plants that are environmental nightmares 24/7.

[AMD]

Retracted - 2008

[smirnoff]

All but one of them has caused environmental damage.

And no what happens is the same as Chernobyl the heavy water is used to control the reaction not cause it and if to little is there then it goes out of control.

The safty system basicly adds to much and smoothers the reaction but its was made back in 1957 to the standards then which are way below what we have now.

The Chernobyl one was based on the CANDU reactor so it gives you a idea what happens if theres not enough water.

[AMD]

Retracted - 2008

[smirnoff]

Scary isn't it.

Heck is every home had its own solar panels and one small windmill they wouldn't need to be on the grid for the most part or at all.

[T_Totler]

Heck is every home had its own solar panels and one small windmill they wouldn't need to be on the grid for the most part or at all.
True, but then you'd have people complaining to city hall saying how unsightly those windmills in their neighbour's backyard are.

[Just Doug1]

True, but then you'd have people complaining to city hall saying how unsightly those windmills in their neighbour's backyard are.
I know the mentality.

When our complex re-did the shingles, I suggested that we install a small turbine vent for each unit as they keep the attic much cooler and that can extend the life of the shingles considerably, reduce air-conditioning loads, etc, etc.

The idea was veto'ed and to quote the president of the board "We certainly don't want our complex to look like some low-income housing project". (The region had done the same thing on some public housing for exactly the same reasons)

Stupid f'ing cow!

[Mouse]

I bet she wears a lot of make-up.

Ask her if she thinks it makes her look like a hooker?

[chief]

Fusion power, now thats the way :D

[sickcars]

Fusion power, now thats the way :D


Just get a really really big hampster wheel and make criminals run it to produce power :)