Kasz216 said:
SciFiBoy said:
Kasz216 said:
SciFiBoy said:
Kasz216 said:
Actually Nuclear power is safe.... a lot safer then people think.
The effects of Nuclear radiation have been greatly exaggerated.
You'd be surprised what the research on Chernobyl and Japan show. |
okay, im listening, please elaborate on this?
|
Chernoybl for example was expected to kill hundreds of thousands.
Actual deatholl so far.... 54.
Total expected.... 4,000... and even that could be overestimated.... since the people in the area didn't exactly have the best medical treatment and high cancer detection rates... and it's assuming every case of cancer is caused by the radiation.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article685386.ece
In general the Nuclear attacks in Japan don't really show significant effects on the granchildren and in most cases the children of those effected.
Plus, this is with the old reactors... new reactors are so ridiculiously safe... they have so many failsafes it's ridiculious.
If you look what leads to nuclear breakdowns... it takes like 6 or 7 catastrophic mistakes to blow something up.
|
oh I see, well, if that is true then it might be worth looking into then, the next question would be viability in the UK, do you have any stuff on that?
|
To my knowledge they're viable everywhere. That's what makes them so valuable to "clean" technology, unlike Solar, Water or Wind plants you can pretty much put one down anywhere you have the space.
That's why people say Nucelear power is the only viable green energy source we have currently.
|
It takes AT LEAST FIFTEEN YEARS to recoup the cost of building a nuclear power plant.
Germany is at the forefront of solar power. (surprising given their climate)
“Thirty years from now, is ExxonMobil going to be in the solar energy business?”
“I think that they’ll either be in the solar energy business or they won’t be in business"
