SI
SI
discoversearch

Pastimes
The Case for Nuclear Energy
An SI Board Since January 2001
Posts SubjectMarks Bans
263 18 0
Emcee:  Hawkmoon Type:  Moderated
I've recently been reacquainting myself with some of the writings of Sci-Fi author, James P. Hogan, who is an outspoken advocate of Nuclear Energy. Hogan, in his essay "Know Nukes" has made some very compelling arguments in support of building more plants, while convincingly dispelling the fear mongering negative claims by the opposition.

jamesphogan.com
ornl.gov

And a great link provided by Raymond Duray that sums up many of the same points Hogan discusses:

c-n-t-a.com

In fact, Hogan goes so far as to accuse the anti-nuke leadership of actually having "Mathusianist" intentions, seeking to deprive developing nations of the unlimited and relatively inexpensive energy resources so necessary to forming the foundation of a industialize society.

It is his very logical contention that Nuclear Energy has far less actual, or potential, environmental impact on nature or society than does the use of fossil fuels such as coal, oil, or natural gas.

So the purpose of this thread is to argue the case for, and against, the expanded use of Nuclear Energy as a means for powering our society. I think it is especially important given the current persistent power shortages being experienced in California as a direct result of the NIMBY mindset created by the environmentalist left.

This is a moderated thread, so I retain the ultimate discretion as to who is able to participate. My ground rules are pretty simple. If you are going to make a claim, be willing to back it up with logic or outright supported fact.

My goal is that we can ultimately provide a resource for educating folks about what it takes to power a modern day society, as well as the constant cost/benefit analysis involved in making public policy decision about energy.

Here are some selected links that I find useful with regard to educating ourselves about nuclear power. I will update them from time to time so check in for changes:

nei.org (% of power generated by nukes)
ans.neep.wisc.edu

uic.com.au

Thorium?

blogs.forbes.com
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
ReplyMessage PreviewFromRecsPosted
263Why I changed my mind about nuclear power [youtube video] youtube.comTimF1November 30
262[graphic] [graphic][graphic] [graphic] Reprinted with permission of Penguin TimF1February 26
261Why Can People Live in Hiroshima and Nagasaki Now, But Not Chernobyl? October 24TimF1February 26
260GE and SO to commercialize PRISM .. PR dated 11/01/16 ===== GE HitachTriffin-11/14/2016
259Spent Fuel Pool What if I took a swim in a typical spent nuclear fuel pool? WTimF16/9/2015
258Why nuclear power costs so much Published on Sunday, October 27, 2013, updated STimF14/18/2014
257Does a new approach to nuclear make economic sense? Small, mass-produced reacTimF-6/3/2013
256THE most important gov't energy investment in Obama's second term: (Noteteevee-11/28/2012
255This UK development in efficient energy storage would be extraordinarily well sunigel bates110/16/2012
254Funny nuclear numbers October 7th, 2012 · 5 Comments One of these two TimF110/8/2012
253The biggest reason the Fukushima plant went into meltdown is because the backup Hawkmoon18/20/2012
252The Panic Over Fukushima Japan's nuclear accident was a great human tragedyTimF18/19/2012
251I've only watched the first 16 minutes so far. One silly point from the greTimF27/5/2012
250An interesting video on Thorium.. Would be interested in comments for those youHawkmoon-7/5/2012
249The Secret City Jun 25, 2012 Starting in 1942, the U.S. government beTimF16/25/2012
248Hmm... I guess it should be amended as the largest KNOWN short term threat, IMO.Hawkmoon-4/8/2012
247Even if the plant is as dangerous as that blog post claims, the title would stilTimF-4/8/2012
246I certainly hope that it is Tim. But I'm not so confident given the level oHawkmoon-4/8/2012
245That headline is hyperboleTimF-4/8/2012
244Tim, I'm not confident the crisis at Fukushima is over yet.. Just some asHawkmoon-4/8/2012
243Nuclear Overreaction Just how dangerous are low doses of radiation? TimF-4/2/2012
242gt-mhr.ga.comTimF112/17/2011
241It's Not the Scary Things that Kill You jeffwise.net Message 27705029TimF-10/16/2011
240New UK nuclear plant sites named Ministers have announced plans for the next geTimF-6/27/2011
239Obama’s Transparency on Science Doesn’t Include Nuclear Today the House CommittTimF-6/12/2011
Previous 25 | Next 25 | View Recent | Post Message
Go to reply# or date (mm/dd/yy):
Copyright © 1995-2017 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.Stock quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes - See Terms of Use.