Hmm..

Mar 01, 2007 13:08

http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,21307346-31037,00.html

It's kind of scary how the government is using the cost as an argument against the implementation of a far cleaner source of energy (lower emissions anyone?). The only (possibly ( Read more... )

q&a, news

Leave a comment

_leareth March 1 2007, 06:38:43 UTC
No. Absolutely not. Clean energy is all well and good, but not when there's the risk of terrorist attack or accident creating Chernobyl in our country. Besides, radioactive waste lasts for /millions/ of years -- how can anyone be so arrogant as to think that sealing it up in a mountain will be okay for that long?

Reply

kechara_ March 1 2007, 06:50:15 UTC
Hmm so you think the long-term damage from coal power plant emissions is nothing compared to the threat of a nuclear meltdown? (although to me, from the sounds of things we're kind of screwed either way)

Reply

_leareth March 1 2007, 06:54:56 UTC
Both are going to be screw us over, but when there are other sources of energy such as wind and solar (if we can figure out how to get it more efficiently) we shouldn't have to choose the lesser of the two evils. Also, given how much coolant and water is needed to run nuclear power plants, I don't think nuclear is the brightest of ideas for Australia given our water situation.

Reply

kechara_ March 1 2007, 08:58:03 UTC
Hmm yeah it would be nice if we could get solar going, not too sure about wind power.. but I guess given the amount of coastline we have it might work also?

Haha yeah fair enough with the crappy water situation thing.. I've only started paying attention to nuclear energy recently, so all I know about it is what I've read in the news so far.

Reply

j3ffu March 1 2007, 09:07:47 UTC
AGREED.
Its basically a mentality that is akin to the whole 'oh, the later generations will fix it' much like it was before where 'oh, the later generations will pay off our debts'.
It is the only way which is really possible within the next 10 years or so, however, short term solutions will end up being long term problems for future generations. And I for one dont know what I'd want to do with a bunch of radioactive waste, especially when it keeps building up...

Reply

kechara_ March 1 2007, 09:13:39 UTC
Hmm the only problem with keeping coal power is that the later generations will still feel the effects of that in the long run, so it is also not exactly the best of choices to just do nothing either..

Reply


Leave a comment

Up