How environmentally friendly is nuclear energy?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Which pollutes the atmosphere with carbon dioxide and requires the distilled products of petroelum to make fertilisers to grow the biomass. And even though I agree we should move partly in that direction, it does not alter the fact that nuclear is cleaner than fossil.
 
Ophiolite said:
Which pollutes the atmosphere with carbon dioxide and requires the distilled products of petroelum to make fertilisers to grow the biomass. And even though I agree we should move partly in that direction, it does not alter the fact that nuclear is cleaner than fossil.
Click to expand...
:eek: :rolleyes: :bugeye:
 
Singularity said:
Use Bio fuel.
Click to expand...

Bio fuel would be lovely, if only it could produce the volume of energy we need, on the timescales we need it in. In the long term, yes, it would be great having people farm oil producing fauna, and converting that to fuel, or making alcohol based on fermented plants, and of course it would all be carbon neutral.

But in the short term, nuclear really is our only option.
 
phlogistician said:
Bio fuel would be lovely, if only it could produce the volume of energy we need, on the timescales we need it in. In the long term, yes, it would be great having people farm oil producing fauna, and converting that to fuel, or making alcohol based on fermented plants, and of course it would all be carbon neutral.

But in the short term, nuclear really is our only option.
Click to expand...
And what long term efforts are being taken for ?
 
And efficient renewables (wind, sun, maybe tide) in rural areas, small communities.
 
For example

3 Dec 2004
The Technical University of Denmark (DTU) yesterday opened the Danish Center for Biofuels (DCB), a new centre comprising research groups from DTU, Risø National Research Laboratory and the Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University. The aim of the centre is to support development and creation of sustainable technologies for the utilisation of biomass, primarily for production of bioethanol, biogas and biohydrogen, through research, education and industrial collaboration. Source: http://www.investindk.com/visNyhed.asp?artikelID=12285

This site from the USDA Agricultural Research Service, http://www.nal.usda.gov/ttic/biofuels/research.htm
links to many reports and studies in the following topic areas:

Ethanol and Biodiesel Fuels--Production and Profitability.
Research on Other Biofuels and General Research
Production of Raw Materials/Crops for Biofuels
Economic Research
Market Research
Benefits and Drawbacks of Biofuels


Here you can read about the details of research being carried out at Kyoto University.
http://energy.coe21.kyoto-u.ac.jp/eng/task-bio/

Those are just three examples from over five hundred hits for "biofuel research". So, Singularity, it is an active field: one which, incidentally, received a boost when Bush doubled the federal budget for research in this area a couple of weeks ago.
 
Personally I think that biofuel is a better option than the much praised hydrogen fuel cells.
> It is safer to produce and transport
> It can be made virtually anywhere, no need for expensive factories, etc
> It will be a good reason to convert desert areas into green fuel fields (will help to reduce co2)
> Poor countries will be able to produce and sell it.

> It smells good :p (alcohol)
 
and dont forget bio fuel HEMP. usually left out of debate for errrrr 'legal' reasons, or 'ILlegal' reasons , as the 'case' may be.
 
duendy said:
and dont forget bio fuel HEMP. usually left out of debate for errrrr 'legal' reasons, or 'ILlegal' reasons , as the 'case' may be.
Click to expand...

Bad luck though duendy, the variety that is useful for making fuel from is lousy spliff. We also have enough other varieties of oil yielding plant to make explicitly growing hemp pointless.
 
phlogistician said:
Bad luck though duendy, the variety that is useful for making fuel from is lousy spliff. We also have enough other varieties of oil yielding plant to make explicitly growing hemp pointless.
Click to expand...
(throws hands up in utter shock and surprise) that phlo should believe this......not
wrong agin dude!
 
duendy, useful varieties of hemp are very low in THC content. All of the campaining pro Hemp is just political, and you seem to have fallen the for PR exercise. It's an attempt at backdoor declassification of Hemp by making some utilitarian argument, so smoking varieties can be grown, but without mentioning smoking as an agenda item.
 
duendy said:
(throws hands up in utter shock and surprise) that phlo should believe this......not
wrong agin dude!
Click to expand...
The problem in you, duendy, is that you believe.. everything some lame crackpot website throws at you.
And you can't claim to have done scientific research if all the data you got was through a process of intoxication using shrooms or other halucinogens.

I understand that you'd love a world where you eat, burn, drink, smoke and fly on hemp, but it is not going to happen.
 
phlogistician said:
duendy, useful varieties of hemp are very low in THC content.

me)))i know tis you silly silly. migh have known you'd PREsume. you always do!

All of the campaining pro Hemp is just political, and you seem to have fallen the for PR exercise.

me))no tis YO thats fallen into presuming yo know what 'drug addled' (your usual charming term for me, and people like me who spea out against war on drugs) duendy is on about

It's an attempt at backdoor declassification of Hemp by making some utilitarian argument, so smoking varieties can be grown, but without mentioning smoking as an agenda item.
Click to expand...

look. i have not one worry that the rightfull freedom of growing and smoking or making bronies etc etc is rightfully free agin. it is an utter disgrace yo and those you admire criminalize tis freedom. but that is for anoter thread. the whole reason i worded what i said even MENTIONING about this is cause i know when even te mention of HEMP does for reactionairies like you'll. wonder yo aint called the cops already!
you obviously are completely ignorant that the very propaganda--instigated by Anslinger-- AGAINST HEMP originated NOT in the fear of the actual THC potential of certian kinds of hemp, but was for the precize purpose of demonizing it so as to crush competiton fro the other big boy industres, plastics, oil, paper, etc. go learn. try and also cath the film 'Grass'. it's all there.
 
Ignorant person. Justify, with scientifically presented evidence, your contention.

I suspect you have only the dimmest idea of what nuclear fusion is. Tell, me, if it was in your power to do so, would you put a stop to all nuclear fusion today?
 
Avatar said:
The problem in you, duendy, is that you believe.. everything some lame crackpot website throws at you.
And you can't claim to have done scientific research if all the data you got was through a process of intoxication using shrooms or other halucinogens.

me))cheeeky pale boy from latvia.
look. what exACTLY do you dooo youngen. seriously. what makes you think you have the qulification to spak about what you do, show me yer resume whoy dont ya. yu seem to know a hell of a lot about tis subject.
I went to te trouble of questing an experienced person who knows his nulear physics, and is renowned in the wolr d community fo his ecological literacy, etc. Yes, Fritjof Capra. yet you just imiss all he has to say and drivvle on with silly-arsed insubstantiated comments,and really silly ideas,nt fit for such a serious debat as this. then have the NERVE to try and point the finger at ..meee.? i'd give it a good bite if it got to near my face boyo!

I understand that you'd love a world where you eat, burn, drink, smoke and fly on hemp, but it is not going to happen.
Click to expand...
read what i said to phlo, you dull soberite
 
Ophiolite said:
....
Those are just three examples from over five hundred hits for "biofuel research". So, Singularity, it is an active field: one which, incidentally, received a boost when Bush doubled the federal budget for research in this area a couple of weeks ago.
Click to expand...
So , do U think it wise to first invest in research of these technologies or the ones like Fusion that seem out of todays technologies ?

I mean billions of Dollars, looking at todays looming global disasters ?

BTW , thoes are cool links.
 
I read. And I smiled.

Your arguments are not logical, because there are a lot of other plants other than hemp from which you can make biofuel.

In Latvia there is a plan hanging in air now to grow rape (or canola) because it can be used for that purpose and that plant grows very well in our climate zone,
in Brasil I heard they grow corn for this purpose.
 
Singularity said:
So , do U think it wise to first invest in research of these technologies or the ones like Fusion that seem out of todays technologies ?
I mean billions of Dollars, looking at todays looming global disasters ?
BTW , thoes are cool links.
Click to expand...
Singularity (or Anomalous), it's not for your little head to decide. Design is ready, money is there and the building site in France has been found. ITER will be up and running by the end of 2016.
http://www.iter.org/pics/constructionschedule6.pdf
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top