The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #90532   Message #1718104
Posted By: GUEST
14-Apr-06 - 11:06 AM
Thread Name: BS: Nuke vs. Fossil Elec/Cost-Benefit?
Subject: RE: BS: Nuke vs. Fossil Elec/Cost-Benefit?
Someone up there mentioned water. Water is one of the two main problems with going nuke.

Humans need water, and a lot of it, to survive. Not have a "lifestyle". Survive.

There may be a time when the generation of nuclear energy isn't in primitive stages that it's in today. Perhaps it can be made safe and efficient, but we aren't there yet.

The problems associated with use of a huge amount of water to generate energy with nukes is never discussed, just like what happens if the waste storage leaks into your water supply is never discussed.

And when your water supply is contaminated, you is fucked.

That's what makes the true cost of nuclear energy far too high.

And by the way, another correction as to what getting energy addiction under control means: a DIFFERENT standard of living, not a LOWERED standard of living.

I for one am looking forward to the day when the consumer addiction to cheap plastic crap is no longer sustainable. Ditto the need for new white sneakers every few months.

There will be many solutions, not just one. But the major paradigm shift will come when we are forced to create small, localized energy generating solutions. Which, BTW, will hopefully lock out the current energy industry as "owners" of our energy, under the bogus guise of "managing" our energy for us.

See, just like democracy, where the price of our freedom is daily citizenship, energy generation will always be about who will chop the wood and carry the water. Because we flabby assed Americans don't want to chop our own wood and carry our own water, we've sold our freedom and our souls for what we think is our human right to be lazy and let someone else do for us what we should be doing for ourselves.