If I have given the impression that there are no legitimate fears and dangers associated with nuclear power I apologize. That was not my intent. Of course there are dangers and problems. My position is that these can be dealt with rationally and safely. And it is not my intent to make you appear to be an irrational fool. I guess I need to start using those smiley faced, and other, icons. So, here we go :/
In your link to Sellafield it says, among other things, the following:
The Sellafield nuclear installation in north-west England produces vital energy to the people of the United Kingdom. It also produces weapons grade material needed for the production of nuclear weapons. For these reasons, Sellafield is an important facility for the U.K. in terms of domestic and security needs. Although Sellafield provides important services for the people and government of the United Kingdom, it has had a detrimental effect on the environment. Since 1952, Sellafield has been dumping radioactive waste into the Irish Sea. This sea is now considered one of the most radioactive bodies of water in the world. Fish, shellfish, and sea plants in the Irish Sea contain substantial amounts of radiation. This is an environmental problem as well as a trade problem. Irish fishermen often catch mutated fish that can not be sold. Also, nuclear waste clean-up facilities that are being developed at Sellafield cost a great deal to finance and are part of growing industry in Great Britain. Exactly—and please notice that Sellafield produces weapons grade plutonium for nuclear weapons. This is a different can of corn than I was proposing in nuclear power vs. weapons. Nuclear plants for the most part use uranium, not plutonium (although plutonium can be a bi product of the process). But I am not a nuclear scientist so I really cannot fully explain this. Any nuclear scientists out there reading these posts that want to weigh in on this?
Lever the Loch Ness:
Sellafield appears to me from your link to be a remnant and product of the cold war. In our neck of the woods we have the Hanford reservation which has similar problems and is a highly polluted site due to the cavalier attitude scientists of the day had towards nuclear waste. This was the time of the atomic bomb race and waste was essentially just dumped into huge metal lined pits as a waste disposal answer, where it remains to this day. There is a huge cleanup effort underway at Hanford but it will take a long time to finish, if indeed it ever does so. I have a friend who worked there for quite awhile and he also tells me of the boondoggle regarding the waste of money being spent there in certain areas that accomplish nothing as far as cleanup, but manage to keep the taxpayer bucks rolling in. The public is often under the impression that if huge amounts of money are thrown at something all will be well. Billions are being spent at Hanford but what really matters is the wisdom on how it is being spent.
In the US we have Yucca Mountain which would make a fabulous waste disposal site
—scientifically that is, not politically. Harry Reid, the US senator (and Senate majority leader) from Nevada will in all likelihood put the kibosh on that however, due to it’s suicidal effect on his reelection chances. Because isn’t that the whole purpose after one is elected? To go round and round and round in the circle game? But really—what else is Nevada good for? God, in his infinite wisdom, who, buy the way speaks to me and my good buddy George the 43rd,
directly informed me that He designed Nevada specifically for three reasons. Gambling, prostitution, and nuclear waste disposal.
Human beings occupy that wasteland at their peril.----Please hold those tomatoes for your salad. They are much too delicious and nutritious to waste on throwing them at me.
And, I am not insisting on nuclear as being the cure all for our energy woes. What I am hoping in nuclear is for it to start replacing coal, dams, and natural gas (for electricity?-you gotta be kidding) as the biggies in electricity production. Alternatives are fine and beneficial, but they will have a difficult time producing the massive amounts of electricity we need now, and in the future. And if I were dictator for life like my good buddy Bush,
I would set up a string of nuclear plants specifically dedicated to crack hydrogen from water. This hydrogen would be used to power fuel cells as a replacement for the internal combustion engine. Fuel cells only emit a small amount of water as waste, and as I have mentioned before, no petroleum!! A divorce from the middle east!! It don’t git any better that that---do it?
And this is a first for me--icons--so bear with me.
