How we will actually lose California?. - Page 2

Osterbaum · 04-29-2010, 05:09 PM

What Prems said.

Azisien · 04-29-2010, 05:27 PM

Solar has its issues, even if there was mass funding for it. And especially if we take into account the environmental aspect, solar is surprisingly dirty due to high life cycle emissions.

Of course as the technology continues to advance and progress it will become cleaner, but it's nowhere near the point where it can replace nuclear, hydroelectric. Fusion is worth reaching, because it's like better, cleaner nuclear, and nukes are already rather clean.

I do say this being a fan of solar and hoping to solar up my someday rooftop, too.

MasterOfMagic · 04-29-2010, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azisien

and nukes are already rather clean.

?

Also: Oh no, not this again.

stabbity death · 04-29-2010, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azisien

Solar has its issues, even if there was mass funding for it. And especially if we take into account the environmental aspect, solar is surprisingly dirty due to high life cycle emissions.

Of course as the technology continues to advance and progress it will become cleaner, but it's nowhere near the point where it can replace nuclear, hydroelectric. Fusion is worth reaching, because it's like better, cleaner nuclear, and nukes are already rather clean.

I do say this being a fan of solar and hoping to solar up my someday rooftop, too.

It may be closer than you think.

Great Cartoonist · 04-29-2010, 06:00 PM

Hang on, isn't this related to the HiPER facility in England where they're trying to create energy by shooting lasers at a small pellet of hydrogen isotopes? Because I'm pretty sure the two projects are similar.

For more info on how this research could potentially END the entire world, please see Robert Brockway's book, Everything is Going to Kill Everybody. Let me give you an excerpt from the New Energy section in Current Threats:

Quote:

Worse Ideas Than Creating a Miniature Sun on Earth

[Error: no data]

Tev · 04-29-2010, 06:03 PM

I'm pretty sure they are similar projects.

Azisien · 04-29-2010, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stabbity death

It may be closer than you think.

Sounds a bit idealistic, no?

Half a million square kilometers of solar panels? Seriously?

The largest one in the world is like, under ten square kilometers. Not to mention the practicality of putting all our power eggs in one basket. It would make far more sense to spread it around. I'm not opposed to huge solar farms in big, useless deserts, but still.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MasterofMagic

Also: Oh no, not this again

Yes, barrels with radioactive signs on them. Oh no save us!!!!

So little waste is actually produced by nuclear power, compared to most other power sources. Tens of thousands of tonnes of waste per year, yes, of high atomic weight compounds (so, duh), not to mention that's a really small number on the global scale. It is, literally, something we can just step back and contain temporarily until research and technology allows for disposal or recycling. And then probably fusion and other powers can take over.

EDIT: Probably worth noting that energy efficiency is a worthwhile venture right now. I imagine we'd need less power plants in 2030 rather than more if we just stopped being so wasteful in almost every aspect of our lives. With emphasis on the US and Canada.

Tev · 04-29-2010, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azisien

So little waste is actually produced by nuclear power, compared to most other power sources. Tens of thousands of tonnes of waste per year, yes, of high atomic weight compounds (so, duh), not to mention that's a really small number on the global scale. It is, literally, something we can just step back and contain temporarily until research and technology allows for disposal or recycling. And then probably fusion and other powers can take over.

What's actually sad is how wasteful we are with our nuclear supplies here in the US. When a rod gets old in other countries they just pull it out and scrape off the crap shine it up and put it back. We change out the whole dame rod after it's like 10% used and stuff it under a mountain.

Azisien · 04-29-2010, 06:19 PM

I imagine all the automobiles in and around the plants are hummer limos as well.

Kyanbu The Legend · 04-29-2010, 07:34 PM

Well California is officially worse then Texas and New Jersey. (no offense)

If the world nations panic about this, I'll support then greatly on the issue

because nothing good ever comes from build a star on a planet.

04-29-2010, 05:09 PM	#11
Osterbaum The revolution will be memed! Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: FIN Posts: 5,967	What Prems said. __________________ D is for Dirty Commie!

04-29-2010, 07:34 PM	#20
Kyanbu The Legend Local Rookie Indie Dev Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: New Jersey Posts: 5,497	Well California is officially worse then Texas and New Jersey. (no offense) If the world nations panic about this, I'll support then greatly on the issue because nothing good ever comes from build a star on a planet. __________________

04-29-2010, 05:27 PM	#12
Azisien wat Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,177	Solar has its issues, even if there was mass funding for it. And especially if we take into account the environmental aspect, solar is surprisingly dirty due to high life cycle emissions. Of course as the technology continues to advance and progress it will become cleaner, but it's nowhere near the point where it can replace nuclear, hydroelectric. Fusion is worth reaching, because it's like better, cleaner nuclear, and nukes are already rather clean. I do say this being a fan of solar and hoping to solar up my someday rooftop, too.

04-29-2010, 06:19 PM	#19
Azisien wat Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,177	I imagine all the automobiles in and around the plants are hummer limos as well.