AAR
Click here for full forums index
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
 
Pickens Plan
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AAR Forum Index -> The Wild Wild West Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Cora



Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 1127
Location: Bremen, Germany

PostPosted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 7:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LizE wrote:

Cora, 'fess up, are you a secret Greenpeace operative, one of those "environmental" types who is dedicated to stoking our fears? Because we know how those "environmental" groups are, always making stuff up just to scare us, like the time they said a pharma company was dumping millions of gallons of toxic chemicals offhsore in NJ . . . oh wait, that turned out to be true. Well, whatever.


For the record, I have beef with Greenpeace, because I had some bad experiences with them and their tactics in the 1980s (long story, culminating with me seriously considering peeing onto the feet of Greenpeace activists).

As for nuclear energy, IMO it's a technological dead end that should be phased out as soon as possible, because the risks in no way make up for the benefits. I don't know how anyone who had seen the photos of Pribjat, the Ukrainian town right next to the Chernobyl reactor that has been deserted for 22 years, and still be in favour of nuclear power. I am not particularly keen on being forced to evacuate my home with maybe an hour's notice, being forced to leave my possessions behind, even though I have probably caught a lethal or at least cancer-worthy dose of radiation anyway, in case one of the approximately four nuclear reactors close enough to be dangerous blows up. Oh yes, and one of those four reactors has been linked to an uncommon cluster of leukemia cases in the immediate vicinity of the power station (See here for more information).

Besides, the one benefit of nuclear power, that it is cheap, evaporates once you calculate the enormous costs resulting from dealing with the waste. A nuclear reactor has a running time of maybe forty years. The waste generated in order to provide cheap energy for forty years will remain hazardous for thousands of years.

Nuclear submarines are a slightly different issue, because the reactors are smaller and hence the danger of causing large-scale radioactive fall-out is less severe. Plus, unlike power stations nuclear submarines don't usually operate near major population centers, unless they are in harbour. The waste is still an issue, though, because there is no safe and permanent disposal. For that matter, leaking waste from rusting Soviet era nuclear submarines is polluting the Barent Sea and other Russian coastal waters.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
LizE



Joined: 22 Mar 2007
Posts: 253

PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cora wrote:
For the record, I have beef with Greenpeace, because I had some bad experiences with them and their tactics in the 1980s (long story, culminating with me seriously considering peeing onto the feet of Greenpeace activists).


That sounds like a good story...sure you don't want to share? I have mixed feelings about Greenpeace, actually. I like many of their goals, but the execution often leaves much to be desired.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    AAR Forum Index -> The Wild Wild West Forum All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group