Green Guru supports nuclear power

BillyTK said:

Well what's wrong with <del>dumping</del> storing it where we've always <del>dumped</del> stored it - the Irish Sea? :p
Click to expand...

Well, if we start shipping it to Nevada (to get a good reaction from Nyarlathotep) on one of those dubious Greek tramp steamers (to get a good reaction from Cleopatra), it will likely sink before it's got much out of Liverpool and end up there anyway. Which will get a good reaction from Shane Costello.

If we can then somehow work in an insinuation that Mossad were involved, and that the whole thing could have been avoided if we'd all had guns, the forum will remain a busy place long after the Dread Split.
 
Seriously, though, is there any possibility of reprocessing waste repeatedly, until there is just a small amount of it left? If the "spent" fuel rods are still so dangerously radioactive is there not some practical use they could be put to (other than shipping them to Nevada ;) )
 
richardm said:
Seriously, though, is there any possibility of reprocessing waste repeatedly, until there is just a small amount of it left? If the "spent" fuel rods are still so dangerously radioactive is there not some practical use they could be put to (other than shipping them to Nevada ;) )
Click to expand...

From what I have read, the technology to recycle spent fuel rods exists, but is cost prohibitive. Hopefully continued work in the area will make it less so.

P.S. By admitting that you are trying a reaction out of me, you make it much less likely that you will get a reaction out of me. Just a piece of advice for future attempts;)
 
Nyarlathotep said:

P.S. By admitting that you are trying a reaction out of me, you make it much less likely that you will get a reaction out of me. Just a piece of advice for future attempts;)
Click to expand...
I think all nuclear waste should be sent to Nevada, and they don't need to bury it either. I mean that costs money :eek: Just dump it somewhere, and let the locals clean it up, preferably in a populated area since they'll clean it up sooner. I'm' not jooking either, this is a completly serious proposal. so there. :p
 
Kerberos said:

I think all nuclear waste should be sent to Nevada, and they don't need to bury it either. I mean that costs money :eek: Just dump it somewhere, and let the locals clean it up, preferably in a populated area since they'll clean it up sooner. I'm' not jooking either, this is a completly serious proposal. so there. :p
Click to expand...

You knock it off too.;)

Though, given the attitude of my government and most of my countrymen to the issue and toward my state, it surprises me that I haven't heard such a proposal floated around for real.

Though if the populated area in question were Vegas, I don't think I would object all that much. Those b@stards have been ticking me off lately (no offense to you, Moe Faux)
 
I'm afraid I don't know the "Green Guru" in question, but I hope this starts a trend. I've been a member of an environmentalist advocacy organization for quite a number of years and yet I've always been a proponent of nuclear power. Never understood the almost automatic rejection of nuclear power among many environmentalist groups.
 
Nyarlathotep said:


From what I have read, the technology to recycle spent fuel rods exists, but is cost prohibitive. Hopefully continued work in the area will make it less so.
Click to expand...

I wonder, in the long run is it more or less expensive than trying to hide it?

P.S. By admitting that you are trying a reaction out of me, you make it much less likely that you will get a reaction out of me. Just a piece of advice for future attempts;)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I thought as much, but I just couldn't resist :D
 
Rocky said:


Yes.
Click to expand...

And yet, that's an F4 Phantom. Titchy, compared to a 747, shurely?

I still stand by my idea of burying the reactor as the only saviour of mankind.

And "RichardM Auguring Ltd." stand by me in this ;)
 
richardm said:


And yet, that's an F4 Phantom. Titchy, compared to a 747, shurely?

I still stand by my idea of burying the reactor as the only saviour of mankind.

And "RichardM Auguring Ltd." stand by me in this ;)
Click to expand...

On a per square inch compairison, they should be nearly the same. Burying sounds like a good idea except for the added cost, you would still want a thick cement shell.


Idea:
Dig a big hole.
Install reactor inside hole
Cover with a land fill and/or Airport.
Add a prision for cheep labor.
Solve NIMBY issues all at once.
 
Originally posted by richardm:
Well, if we start shipping it to Nevada (to get a good reaction from Nyarlathotep) on one of those dubious Greek tramp steamers (to get a good reaction from Cleopatra), it will likely sink before it's got much out of Liverpool and end up there anyway. Which will get a good reaction from Shane Costello.
Click to expand...

Well, I live on the west coast, so it oughtn't bother me that much.
 
Actually, what better place to store it than Glasgow? One of that city's favourite sons, Billy Connolly, is on record as saying that if they dropped an A-Bomb on Clydeside the city would look just the same after the event as it did beforehand. An accident involving nuclear waste would probably go unnoticed.
 
Shane Costello said:
Actually, what better place to store it than Glasgow? One of that city's favourite sons, Billy Connolly, is on record as saying that if they dropped an A-Bomb on Clydeside the city would look just the same after the event as it did beforehand. An accident involving nuclear waste would probably go unnoticed.
Click to expand...

Too expensive. All the extra security you'd need to stop the locals nicking it would cost a fortune.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom