Climate Change - so I'm starting to panic a bit
Still, the ESAS is not on the radar of mainstream science
It is called the Clathrate gun hypothesis and it is on the radar of "mainstream science".
Posted by: tungsten
from what i've read nuclear tech has advanced a fair bit.
Ok, we store the waste where ever you are.
Posted by: Endur-Bro
What's wrong with you?
I know.
I’m unsure how to directly copy an image to the new bb on iOS
Halp meeee!
Posted by: tungsten
Ok, we store the waste where ever you are.
Modern designs are much better at recycling nuclear waste and at the end of the day, the math requires it if we are going to handle climate change. Desperate times call for desperate measures. Maybe in 20 years we will have fusion and can decommission them, but for now, it should be all hands on deck.
And it takes at least 10 years to design, get permits, build and commission a modern nuclear plant to current safety standards. So even if we start today, it's a long wait to being able to decommission significant numbers of coal plants. Wind, tidal and solar with various storage solutions can help, but the real solution is to avoid putting all of our energy investments into one fuel type aka fossil fuels.
Posted by: tungsten
Ok, we store the waste where ever you are.
Better than current energy production, which spews the waste into the atmosphere and slowly kills every bit of life on the planet.
Posted by: chupacabra
Posted by: tungsten
Ok, we store the waste where ever you are.
Modern designs are much better at recycling nuclear waste and at the end of the day, the math requires it if we are going to handle climate change. Desperate times call for desperate measures. Maybe in 20 years we will have fusion and can decommission them, but for now, it should be all hands on deck.
Modern eh? Fukushima didnt have use the GE design when built and in theory, the 3/11 issue would be somewhat smaller due to better design.
Want a better design? Dont put Newclear energy plants on a fault line. If you looked up that number, your outlook for the future may lessen even more.
Posted by: KenN
Posted by: tungsten
Ok, we store the waste where ever you are.
Better than current energy production, which spews the waste into the atmosphere and slowly kills every bit of life on the planet.
But but but, everyone's argument for the Fukushima issue was the Ocean was soo massive it'd dilute, even with contintual build up over time.
How is the air any different?
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
Modern eh? Fukushima didnt have use the GE design when built and in theory, the 3/11 issue would be somewhat smaller due to better design.
Want a better design? Dont put Newclear energy plants on a fault line. If you looked up that number, your outlook for the future may lessen even more.
The could have put the generators on a hill and nothing would have gone wrong at Fukushima. Modern designs typically avoid the need for backup power to shut down. The risk of nuclear reactors is nothing compared to global warming. They are forecasting 45C in the south of France by Friday. Good times.
Posted by: chupacabra
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
Modern eh? Fukushima didnt have use the GE design when built and in theory, the 3/11 issue would be somewhat smaller due to better design.
Want a better design? Dont put Newclear energy plants on a fault line. If you looked up that number, your outlook for the future may lessen even more.
The could have put the generators on a hill and nothing would have gone wrong at Fukushima. Modern designs typically avoid the need for backup power to shut down. The risk of nuclear reactors is nothing compared to global warming. They are forecasting 45C in the south of France by Friday. Good times.
And it snowed in Yellowstone on the 21st.
Forum jump: