|
LA Blackout | by VivianC | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
A non-biased question | by Kickstart | 2005-09-12 13:41:03 |
|
Can't give a non-biased answer. | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 13:59:00 |
|
What's needed is a *new* energy producer. | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 14:04:39 |
|
The cost of entry is very high. | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 14:07:55 |
| Uh, why reactors? |
by mortaine |
2005-09-12 14:12:51 |
Why not something that's cheaper, safer, and more environmentally sound?
Look, California has a lot of people living in it. Why would we relax the very laws that make it nice for us to continue to live here?
We put solar panels on my previous house-- they were not cheap, but the cost per unit of electricity over the next 10 years was comparable to the cost of electricity. Even if electricity costs didn't go up, which they did, we would have broken even in about 12 years. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
Plus, reactor fuel has doubled in cost | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:16:44 |
|
It earned itself back over 10 years. | by Esteis | 2005-09-12 14:20:31 |
|
Reactors ARE safe, cheap and environmentally sound | by RetiQlum2 | 2005-09-12 14:17:01 |
|
Storage isn't a problem. In 40-50 years | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 14:18:22 |
|
Chernobyl, Three Mile Island | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:19:38 |
|
Chernobyl and Three Mile Island | by Pic | 2005-09-12 14:21:50 |
|
There's no real way of telling that | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:23:15 |
|
Chernobyl was human error. | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 14:26:17 |
|
They did? I'd say "Darwin Award", but unfortunatel | by Esteis | 2005-09-12 14:27:45 |
|
Not entirely | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:30:02 |
|
RetiQlum2's found links regarding Chernobyl. | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 14:34:36 |
|
See here | by Arachnid | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Chernobyl failed because... | by RetiQlum2 | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Not really, | by run.dll | 2005-09-12 18:00:16 |
|
Windscale... | by LionsPhil | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Huh, I'd never heard of that one. | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 15:04:06 |
|
It since got renamed to Sellafield. | by LionsPhil | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Or | by LionsPhil | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
TMI was a non-event | by run.dll | 2005-09-12 18:05:35 |
|
NIMBY applies to wind power, too. | by esbita | 2005-09-12 14:19:46 |
|
Solar? | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 14:25:28 |
|
Up here of course there's no way. | by esbita | 2005-09-12 14:38:58 |
|
Solar B&B | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 15:02:41 |
|
Every power source has its drawbacks | by DevinUll | 2005-09-12 14:55:19 |
|
Hydro dams. | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 14:56:51 |
|
Drawback | by VivianC | 2005-09-12 15:04:26 |
|
That's true, however | by Arachnid | 2005-09-12 15:07:14 |
|
well, ecept for the clyde village anyway | by astro-g | 2005-09-12 19:19:58 |
|
James Bay hydroelectric project in Quebec | by kahuana | 2005-09-12 15:10:16 |
|
Just ask the residents of the Grand Canyon | by altordwm | 2005-09-12 15:06:27 |
|
Cost, Build time, Worker deaths, breaches, | by DevinUll | 2005-09-12 15:08:08 |
|
Beleive me, the random ground shaking here is | by astro-g | 2005-09-12 19:21:58 |
|
They cause the destruction of the river ecology. | by RetiQlum2 | 2005-09-12 16:35:32 |
