Six nuclear power stations planned

Kosmik said:
A question for folks:

Why doesn't the worlds nuclear body get all nuclear powered countries to club in to have their waste sent via rocket towards the sun?

Feasible?
Click to expand...

Not all rocket launches are successful. Just think of the consequences if a rocket carrying nuclear waste fails mid-air.
 
news24 said:
How long have we been using coal? Do we have an Acid rain problem in SA? There are some(in the world of science) who can argue differently about global warming.
Click to expand...

Maybe not a real threat at the moment, but it could be a problem very soon.

Today, acid deposition is present in the northeastern United States, southeastern Canada, and much of Europe including portions of Sweden, Norway, and Germany. In addition, parts of South Asia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, and Southern India are all in danger of being impacted by acid deposition in the future.
Click to expand...

http://geography.about.com/od/globalproblemsandissues/a/acidrain.htm
 
news24 said:
How long have we been using coal? Do we have an Acid rain problem in SA? There are some(in the world of science) who can argue differently about global warming.
Click to expand...

Yes, go talk to the 750 000 people in China who die early deaths each year thanks to the amount of pollution caused by all their coal power plants. I'm sure they are all faking it, it has nothing to do with coal power :whistle:
 
Kosmik said:
A question for folks:

Why doesn't the worlds nuclear body get all nuclear powered countries to club in to have their waste sent via rocket towards the sun?

Feasible?
Click to expand...

news24 said:
Not all rocket launches are successful. Just think of the consequences if a rocket carrying nuclear waste fails mid-air.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It would likely be one the top ten list of human caused disasters. Nice idea though, but difficult to implement safely. Perhaps when/if the space ladder gets built we can do it.
 
Nerfherder said:
That is retarded... we also have a lot of trees why not burn them ?
Click to expand...

That's so retarded, wood is not as efficient as coal, plus its also cheaper. Currently, about 77% of South Africa’s primary energy needs are provided by coal. Due to the relative lack of suitable alternatives. What's going to generate atmospheric oxygen, if we start with deforestation?

Take a look at our map and see that, most of the country is semi-arid to desert.
 
genetic said:
Makes economic sense??

What about the environment???? Long term damage???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel_power_station
Click to expand...

Regard coal as an interim solution. Developing clean burning coal technologies should be concentrated on in SA (hahahahaha!). It does make economic sense. The point is to keep options open and flexible. There are no options with nuclear (except nuclear). With coal-fired power stations, anything that burns is an option (biofuels?). I would be more comfortable with the polluting dimension of burning coal, if SA was less than totally clueless about developing clean-burning strategies for coal.
 
news24 said:
That's so retarded, wood is not as efficient as coal, plus its also cheaper. Currently, about 77% of South Africa’s primary energy needs are provided by coal. Due to the relative lack of suitable alternatives. What's going to generate atmospheric oxygen, if we start with deforestation?

Take a look at our map and see that, most of the country is semi-arid to desert.
Click to expand...

Yes... I was making that point. Just because you have a lot of it doesn't mean you need to burn it.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X