Earthquake accident bridge falls down…. where was that? Chicago…

I say other alternatives need to be actively pursued.

glolady - 19 December 2008 02:38 PM

Earthquake accident bridge falls down…. where was that? Chicago…

I say other alternatives need to be actively pursued.

A bridge and a nuclear reactor are two very different things. I agree that we need to pursue alternatives to nuclear power and nothing else, and I think that given enough time we’ll have the infrastructure in place to use renewable, mostly non-polluting energy. I think we’re talking about decades here, though, if not more. In the meantime, however, I think nuclear is a good option and it’s worth the risk.

Steve Shanafelt - 19 December 2008 02:45 PM

 
A bridge and a nuclear reactor are two very different things. I agree that we need to pursue alternatives to nuclear power and nothing else, and I think that given enough time we’ll have the infrastructure in place to use renewable, mostly non-polluting energy. I think we’re talking about decades here, though, if not more. In the meantime, however, I think nuclear is a good option and it’s worth the risk.

I think we could do it in a single decade if we set our minds to it and made it a national priority

4tees - 19 December 2008 03:21 PM

I think we could do it in a single decade if we set our minds to it and made it a national priority

Do you mean entirely converting the country’s energy supply to alternative energy sources, or just offsetting the increased demand with new alternatives? I think the latter is certainly possible, but it would be a massive undertaking. Converting the entire power supply over would be a much bigger task.

Aren’t there something like 1,500 coal-burning power plants in America? Replacing all of those would take decades at least, and that doesn’t even address what it would take to replace the 100 or so existing nuclear plants. There’s also the problem of creating factories to create the hundreds of thousands—perhaps millions—of solar panels and wind-powered turbines needed to make that changeover happen. Just building factories that could handle that demand would take years. (Might be an idea for saving Detroit, though.) I think we’re talking about 20 or 30 years worth of work here, if not more.

That said, I think it’s well-worth looking into. A few decades is a blip, really, and the long-term gain would probably be worth it, particularly of we can get the existing energy use down to complement it.

To do it in a decade (a total conversion away from fossil fuels for the power grid) would require the type of national dedication and mobilization not seen since WWII; but it is possible, and would result in a tremendous real economic boom that would benefit all rather than just the few who benefit now.

4tees - 19 December 2008 04:12 PM

To do it in a decade (a total conversion away from fossil fuels for the power grid) would require the type of national dedication and mobilization not seen since WWII; but it is possible, and would result in a tremendous real economic boom that would benefit all rather than just the few who benefit now.

Oh, I definitely think we could get the ball rolling nicely in a decade. My only quibble is that complete conversion would probably take a lot longer. But I could be wrong. I’ve never seen anything on such a massive scale, so I have no idea if it could happen. You could be completely right.

I think it’s unlikely to happen, however, and that nuclear power provides more bang for the buck in the short-term than other alternatives. (Nuclear bang, that is.) With energy demand increasing, I see nuclear as a very viable option.

I agree

How many empty factories are in a town near you?

Photoluminescent (glow in the dark) products can be used for many applications. Why not a renewable light source instead of electric nuclear etc?

New York City has a law requiring all high rise office buildings over 7 stories to have a glow in the dark escape route system installed. International Law is considering this as well.

If every building would have this system installed… how much saving can you think of?