No More Nuclear Plants

  • Thread starter Thread starter CHRISTINE77
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I can’t seem to understand why clean energy sources are utterly ignored by everyone. It seems even natural disasters push the nation of the world to a hopeless case of dependence to fossil fuel.

Everyone seems to be addicted to oil. Saudi Arabia gets richer when there is war or natural disasters. How fortunate of them that they profit in every event.

Maybe it’s time the bishops endorse Water power instead and support the filipino inventor.
 
trdchubi said:
I can’t seem to understand why clean energy sources are utterly ignored by everyone. It seems even natural disasters push the nation of the world to a hopeless case of dependence to fossil fuel.
Click to expand...
Which clean energy source would you like us to use?

Wind is basically nothing more than a scam (disclamer: I work for a power company who is currently building 3 wind farms). Wind is popular (that’s why they get built), but completely unreliable. Wind is considered to be “efficient” if it runs 35% of the time. Obviously they can’t be baseload plants, and they can’t even be peakers. You just hope to get a little bit of power from them once in a while. Not an investment I’d ever make.

Solar takes up too much space (this is a centralized solar plant), and obviously only works during the day. Decentralized solar may be a very good future investment (but I don’t know if the power grid is currently built for this sort of thing).

Hydro is excellent. But you need a fairly big river (>100 cms, that’s cubic meters per second) to get any real electricity out of it. Also, environmentalists hate them because you need a man made lake (reservoir) to use one efficiently. Run-of-river (which doesn’t have a reservoir and uses the running river instead of the elevation difference) only really works in high velocity streams (like mountain streams).

Biomass can be very good, but you need a good fuel supply (wood waste is a common option). You still get pollutants though (but under most reporting regulations, they are exempt from reporting emissions, so the public doesn’t really know what the true numbers are).
 
i don’t like nuclear plants but it seems to be a cause like oil. You don’t want it but you need it
 
CHRISTINE77 said:
There are no nuclear power plants active in the Philippines today. One plant, located near the Mt. Pinatubo volcano, was abandoned in 1986 after the Chernobyl disaster.
Click to expand...
No nuclear plants should be built next to a volcano, I agree.

Unfortunately, we are running low on energy. Oil will run out, as will gas (much later). Solar also is limited because of the materials needed and hydroelectric is pretty much tapped out. There is still methyl hydrates they may be tapped one day and tidal, current, which too will be limited. Unfortunately, if this world goes on much longer, our only options will be fission or fusion (not yet available).

I find the water car particularly humorous. It breaks down hydrogen and oxygen from water and recombines it for energy. I guess the “inventor” expects no one to know of the law of conservation of energy.
The claims for these devices have been found to be incorrect and some were found to be tied to investment frauds.

Since the combustion step is the exact reverse of the electrolysis step, the energy released in combustion exactly equals the energy consumed in the electrolysis step, and—even assuming 100% efficiency—there would be no energy left over to power the car. In other words, such systems start and end in the same thermodynamic state, and are therefore perpetual motion machines, violating the first law of thermodynamics.
Click to expand...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water-fuelled_car
 
1holycatholic said:
Philippine bishops have no authority or competence in this matter. They are entitled to their opinion, but that’s all it is.
Click to expand...
It’s not opinion. A country like ours is not fit to hold a nuclear power plant. Both the costs and the dangers are enormous. We can’t even have a competent police force, how much more can we botch up in case of a nuclear disaster?

This is without even mentioning the fact that as we are a tropical country. Our ecosystems hold more biodiversity than the rest of the world. Radioactive pollution can only destroy it all.
 
Lost_Wanderer said:
It’s not opinion.
Click to expand...
It is not? Surely you are not claiming nuclear engineering is a matter of faith and moral, or that Holy Orders imparts a charism of nuclear physics. Still, you have a point in the rest of the post. The Philippians is not the best location for such a plant.
 
pnewton said:
It is not? Surely you are not claiming nuclear engineering is a matter of faith and moral, or that Holy Orders imparts a charism of nuclear physics. Still, you have a point in the rest of the post. The Philippians is not the best location for such a plant.
Click to expand...
Perhaps we need to first establish what we mean by opinion. The reason why I do not believe the bishop’s words are an “opinion” is that it is really based on plenty of facts, from environmental to political. Even if he did not speak with the authority of a bishop, the facts remain facts.

Frankly, I’m more concerned with the management of such a plant than whether or not it is even possible without harming the environment. I have a hard time seeing our country with a successful and safe nuclear power plant when politicians here are a complete joke who make a mess of everything they touch. You might as well let loose the Hulk or Godzilla on us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top