Outline ·
[ Standard ] ·
Linear+
Physics Nuclear power?, Use nuclear reactor to generate energy
|
SeaGates
|
Jun 19 2009, 08:06 PM
|
Kisses to the world
|
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... « It only show immediate fatalities but not the long term damage. Nuclear fallout can kill thousands, if not millions through the passage of time. Of course, you can argue that we're killing 6 billions people by heating up the Earth. So what we truly need is renewable energy source. Fusion seems to be the answer but it still far from maturing. For now fission based nuclear plant supplement with decentralized energy generation seems to be the ideal answer. With a decent sized solar panel on every roof of the houses. We eliminate the need of large land area to build solar farm and at the same time reducing the need to generate huge amount of power through nuclear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SeaGates
|
Jun 19 2009, 11:35 PM
|
Kisses to the world
|
QUOTE(IcyDarling @ Jun 19 2009, 10:53 PM) probably we are elft out bcoz we are too scared off the negative side effect of this nuclear QUOTE(NicJolin @ Jun 19 2009, 11:11 PM) Because ppl isn't educated about it. Whenever the nuclear words appear, they'll go OMGWTFNESSBBQ RADIATION!!! They have good reason to fear imo. Events that cause the Three Mile Island and Chernobyl happens all the time, overheating, equipment failure, human error but were brought under control with ease. What happened at Three Mile Island/Chernobyl are a series of continuous mistakes and failure to rectify the problem that caused the meltdown. Unless Malaysia has a well trained crew manning these reactor and even with that, people will still be paranoid about having nuclear plant near their home.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SeaGates
|
Jun 19 2009, 11:53 PM
|
Kisses to the world
|
QUOTE(profdrahhen @ Jun 19 2009, 11:44 PM) nothing to worry about that..
if u travel alot via airplane, you will receive more dose than nearby nuclear reactor.. this is fact..
can u show me where did that accident happen again?? What accident? You mean those overheating, equipment failure? Those are inherent problem when you deal with technologies. It's not accident until someone say 'uh oh'
|
|
|
|
|
|
SeaGates
|
Jun 20 2009, 03:52 PM
|
Kisses to the world
|
QUOTE(befitozi @ Jun 20 2009, 02:46 AM) We may be at the equator, but don't forget, we are a tropical country. When thunderstorm comes, we lose power. Until energy storage( which is infact one of the hardest thing to do) becomes better, we cannot use solar as our main source of energy. Solar energy is actually a wasted resource, so every small bit of harvesting counts. Sunlight contains a lot of energy but the problem is the harvesting method which have pathetic efficiency. We will see that improves in the future to a point that efficiency rate overtakes conventional power plant. Steam based power generator efficiency is not very high. Maybe 30-40%? Majority of the energy are lost through heat and sound. Nuclear power aren't a total solution to fossil fuel plant because it isn't renewable either. We will eventually run out of fission material. So the ideal 'solution' is to supplement fuel based power plant with renewable energy, reducing the strain on limited fuel, be it uranium or Gas/Oil/Coal
|
|
|
|
|
|
SeaGates
|
Jun 20 2009, 04:10 PM
|
Kisses to the world
|
QUOTE(befitozi @ Jun 20 2009, 03:58 PM) What i was trying to say is, if we were to make say 75% of our powergrid sourced by solar, in the event that the sun does not shine, we will have power shortages. It is even more impractical to harvest the energy and store it in giant batteries. Yea fissionable material is not renewable as well. Though it certainly will last much longer than fossil fuels. If only cold-fusion isn't fiction. I did mention 'supplement', and not replace  The only renewable energy source currently is hydroelectric but that's because it has a huge buffer unlike solar/wind. At worst case scenario, hydro dam can dry up and electricity stops flowing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SeaGates
|
Jul 2 2009, 11:48 PM
|
Kisses to the world
|
QUOTE(wild_card_my @ Jun 30 2009, 10:15 PM) will uranium supplied deplete? All natural resource depletes eventually. There's still a lot of uranium for us however.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SeaGates
|
Jul 4 2009, 07:15 PM
|
Kisses to the world
|
QUOTE(befitozi @ Jul 3 2009, 04:12 AM) Dare we say that fresh water supply is in dangerous of depleting before uranium does? Especially if we consider the most grim consequences of global warming. Unless you're able to digest sea water, yes fresh water is depleting faster than uranium.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SeaGates
|
Jul 8 2009, 09:48 PM
|
Kisses to the world
|
QUOTE(devil75 @ Jul 6 2009, 10:03 PM) dont tel u me u wanna go bac into the einstein age and talk about how E=mc2 is proved and how it helped with the progress in nuclear advancement Zzzz... This is an open topic , does every science topic has to involve calculations and equations ? Zzzzz Mathematics is the universal language for the law of the universe, it's inevitable whether you like it or not, nuclear power is no exception.
|
|
|
|
|