ans Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 Late last year, China announced plans to build 30 new reactors - enough to generate twice the capacity of the gargantuan Three Gorges Dam - by 2020. And even that won't be enough. The Future of Nuclear Power, a 2003 study by a blue-ribbon commission headed by former CIA director John Deutch, concludes that by 2050 the PRC could require the equivalent of 200 full-scale nuke plants. A team of Chinese scientists advising the Beijing leadership puts the figure even higher: 300 gigawatts of nuclear output, not much less than the 350 gigawatts produced worldwide today. Read the rest here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC-Drift.com Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 China will make the USA look 3rd world within 2 decades. ...where that leaves us on the other hand is scary :\ I know certain top businessmen in the states are learning chinese (Mandarin probably), and introducing it as a second language in the home for their kids - it's true I tell ya, I heard it from a horses mouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matty Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 I've always been against nuclear power, mainly because of the risks involved with radiation leaks etc. Now my position is changing a bit as it's becoming very obvious we can't rely on fossil fuels for much longer, I would prefer if we could all run totally from renewable energy resources, but do do this would require a huge change in lifestyle for all of us in the western world (a sacrifice many wouldn't wish to make). At present I'm not decided either way on the nuclear stuff, sure it's a form of "clean" energy that doesn't create greenhouse gasses like burning fossil fuels - which gives it a huge advantage here, but at least with fossil fuels - if there's an accident, we're not waiting around for thousands of years for the radiation to subside and having to find somewhere to store radioactive waste. Think we're caught between the devil & the deep blue sea on this one!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted September 3, 2004 Author Share Posted September 3, 2004 having to find somewhere to store radioactive waste. How much volume is produced in nuclear waste from a typical plant per year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matty Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 To be honest, I've no idea how much radio active waste is produced from a powerstation. What I'm trying to express is that we'll have to rely on fossil fuels much less in the near future, unfortunately nuclear power seems to be the only way to go for us to maintain our current (no pun intended) power requirements. If we're all happy to use bicycles and electric public transport to commute, eat only local produce, have low voltage lighting and much less power consuming devices and make a lot of other sacrifices, then it maybe just possible to get away with using only renewable energy. With our present power consumption, there's just no way renewable energy can provide the power we need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripsaw Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 Wasn't there a link on this forum to an article by a top enviromentalist who claimed that Nuclear Power was the cleanest way to generate electricity? Despite Chernobal (which suffered several serious design faults) the biggest problem is simply the public's perception. I'm not sure completely about my opening statement, but various links seem to back it up. Here's one to start people off. This page refers to reports and has counter arguements in the comments section. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Git Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 China will make the USA look 3rd world within 2 decades. Agreed. A lot of money is being invested in China. America is to dependent on oil and it scares me what they might do to get it when the oil runs out. They are 5% of the polulation and yet they use 25% of the world's oil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC-Drift.com Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 How much volume is produced in nuclear waste from a typical plant per year? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> However much or however little it is, as far as we're concerned, it's permanent waste, and growing in volume. Nature provided us with ample supplies of renewable energy, so much in fact we would never make use of it all, so WTF is going on. If every country went green, the manufacturing costs for this plant would drop and cheap clean power is a result with zero emissions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted September 3, 2004 Author Share Posted September 3, 2004 However much or however little it is, as far as we're concerned, it's permanent waste, and growing in volume. Well what I was trying to establish was if it would be cost effective to fire it into the sun or whether too much of it is generated annually for that to be realistic. Googling seemed to indciate it wouldn't be About 25 tonnes of spent fuel is taken each year from the core of a l000 MWe nuclear reactor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC-Drift.com Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 There must be some use for spent fuel.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Git Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 I think the earlier nuclear reactors produced lots of spent fuel which could be reprocessed for the arms race. Newer nuclear reactors are a lot more efficient in producing energy without so much waste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkey_magic Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 Well what I was trying to establish was if it would be cost effective to fire it into the sun or whether too much of it is generated annually for that to be realistic. Nasa would have to get their act together first. They don't have a very good track record sending people up there successfully, I wouldn't feel too safe if they were firing nuclear waste also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posters Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 I think the earlier nuclear reactors produced lots of spent fuel which could be reprocessed for the arms race Yes, they used a lot of DU (Depleted Uranium) on the weapons for the Gulf Wars. The Iraqi desert is now littered with ordnance with a colossal half life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mission Posted September 3, 2004 Share Posted September 3, 2004 I'd be worried if they started to build up massive stockpiles on nuclear armaments that's for sure. Mind you, there's plenty of other nations that are actively going down that road! It's a shame that the by product of nuclear energy (the spent fuel rods) cannot be cleaned up and reused. Don't they have to encase them in concrete before disposing of them? I don't know where they end up but I wouldn't fancy living anywhere near them that's for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.