Julie R. Neidlinger: Lone Prairie Studies Blog

Nuclear power: the best option for energy in the future?

written by Julie R. Neidlinger 1 comments link this post

Gene has made a bold statement regarding wind farms as power sources. He claims it is all a scam. You can read his blog post for both photos and his thoughts. In the comments section, he further adds to the discussion by saying that:

It's all a scam for suckers who believe in the fairy godmother of windpower.

I think small windpower projects for small usage on site with less elaborate systems make sense. Pumping water, oil, compressing air for storage and generation.

This is just silly and a subsidy driven dumb program to get votes from stupid people.

My comment at Gene's blog was as follows:

Nuclear is only another temporary solution. Where shall we put all of the waste? Seriously -- that is a problem. Hauling it all to Yucca mountain means dragging a lot of dangerous waste through populated centers across the nation and putting millions of people at risk. Also, to completely phase out other power sources and go fully nuclear means that the amount of waste generated will require another Yucca mountain-type facility every few years. Building a nuclear reactor now is incredibly expensive and there will not be enough built to keep up with those that will be phased out around the world. This means we need to start looking at other power sources.

I may be dumb and stupid to not believe wind farms are a joke and bad idea, but I think renewable sources of energy, such as wind, solar, water, geothermal, etc., are valid and important to begin developing. Just because our technology is young or flawed, or that we haven't gotten any further than dipping our feet into the water, doesn't mean it should be pursued.

There is going to be a large wind farm put in north of where I live, in Cavalier County, south of Langdon. I think the wind turbines are rather like sculpture, and I'm hoping this works out. Wind energy is a possibility, an alternative, like others, that shouldn't be tossed out in a rush to go all nuclear.

In a recent article in "The Environmental Magazine", nuclear power was discussed as a clean power source option due to its low carbon emissions, and whether it was as feasible as some are making it out to be. I'm sure some will poo-poo my link to an environmental magazine as choosing a biased source (and many of the articles or political comments in the magazine are not at all to my liking), but the article is informative and not as Chicken-Little-ish as you might imagine.

Links:

Labels: discussion, science

Like this post? Subscribe to the feed. Help support this site. Facebook | Stumble It! | Del.icio.us | DiggIt! | Technorati | Blinklist | Furl | reddit | Newsvine

Links to this post:

<$BlogBacklinkTitle$>: <$BlogBacklinkSnippet$>
posted by <$BlogBacklinkAuthor$> @ <$BlogBacklinkDateTime$>

Create a Link

1 Comments:

Try also Home Power magazine. It gives a whole new meaning to independence and self-reliance.

I don't think there is one solution. Nuclear and wind power will probably both be a part of our future, even though the nuclear waste problem has never been solved. One thing I'd like to see is those megahighways in LA and elsewhere be replaced by electric or magnetic rail. You'd reclaim some of the land, clean the air, and conserve fuel.

By deniro, at August 11, 2007 12:09 PM