No ill talk to you as though you were a mass murderer who thought his putting a tiny bit of effort into a social programme ought to leave him with a negative of murders committed.

An utterly ridiculous braggart.

yes, the huge amount of natural resources and energy it takes to build one of these things and then the huge amount of natural resources and energy it takes to even come close to saying we've reduced the chance that the spent fuel as disposed of will eventually create major environmental damage totally sounds like "saving the environment" (whatever that means) to me.

even if you factor in all the resources/energy/etc. it took to find and extract the crude, transport the crude, refine the crude to gasoline, and transport the gasoline to the pumping station? not to mention the socio/political/environmental costs of relying on either crude from nations even more politically fucked up than ours or gasoline refined from crude extracted by doing the huge amount of environmental damage it takes to exploit the alberta tar sands.

at least here you seem to have a grasp on the importance of building a system of cleaner, more renewable electrical generation to support the invention, construction, manufacturing, transportation, and operation of more clean, renewable technology

cool video.. some of their data points are way off.. but i like the main theme

come again? nuclear power generation does not equal nuclear weapons.

This argument started when you accused me of being an asshole. now, you just apparently accused me of being a mass murderer.. i cant even imagine how heated you are getting.. siting there.. right behind your keyboard.. to have stated such a thing. you have no clue what you are talking about, i think you are the asshole.

Jesus christ it was a metaphor.

GREAT NOW YOU'RE ATTACKING RELIGION

At least jesus would understand that doing good work does not clean your slate, and you should repent for your sins no matter how much charity you do.

Hint for <.wanker.3, imagine scare quotes like this in the above, 'good work'.

coal twice as expensive, and natural gas is five times more expensive than nuclear in terms of dollars per kilowatt of electricity produced. And that is total cost including facilities, not just daily production costs.

the cheapest form of electricity production (even cheaper than nuclear) is hydroelectric.. however this has its downsides also. It destroys local environments on the small scale (the building of a large dam).. and it is very limited in the number of locations where it can be used. geothermal is pretty close to that of nuclear in terms of cost, and i am also a big fan of this method.

in terms of nuclear waste.. at least we can keep track of it.. after 60 years.. there it is.. all the waste we needed to power a major city in one lump, maybe the size of a house or so.. and it isnt going anywhere. the amount of waste you would create from burning fossil fuels to produce an equivalent amount of energy would be millions and millions of times more massive; less detrimental yes, but impossible to control. You have evenly distributed it all into the earth's atmosphere, oceans, and across the land. you will never get it back or be able to control it. technologies that we already have today (but are not yet cost effective or appropriate) could enable us to reduce the amount of nuclear waste by 100 times.. and possible future technology (like fusion) could result in nearly no waste.

also, we have only begun to scratch the surface of nuclear energy.. there is so much more potential there if we continue to research, vice with fossil fuels.. it isn't physically possible to make a coal or nat. gas plant run much more efficiently than they already do.

the future will require a balance of all of these. the percentages of each, i am not sure, but the only thing i know for certain is that there is no future in fossil fuels.

to completely discredit nuclear because of one's fear of what they do not understand is just ignorance.

coal has a lower energy yield by definition because it is not refined.

natural gas is many times more expensive than both coal and gasoline, and the price will continue to skyrocket (very soon, i am talking the next 5 years) to even higher than it is now.

let me say again.. there is no future in fossil fuels.. but this is a long term goal. the facts state that it is impractical at this moment.

to simply assume that you are a greener person by driving an electric car today would be incorrect, and jerk-boy's criticism of me for owning a jeep while i am very concerned about the future of the energy supply and the environment is short sighted and foolish.



yup

hit for you.. owning a jeep is not a sin, fucktard

metaphor

Though for anyone with taste...

how is calling me a mass murder a metaphor for anything

Who else believes global warming and the 'green message' is all just a bunch of politically charged propaganda to make the government and everyone else feel good about themselves?

Ok id ask you to point out where i called you a mass murderer, but we all know you wont find it.
"I shouldnt be considered a heavy polluter because im doing things that might ( if they are always executed to the highest possible standards ) reduce pollution"

"I shouldnt be considered a mass murderer because im doing things that might reduce murder"

If you arent familiar with the technique, its supposed to tease out what is fucking ridiculous about the way you think.

i don't see how those two things compare at all, and i think you are full of shit.

"doing things that might reduce murder?" what the fuck are you talking about

so do you hold people who make gun laws on par with hitler because they are trying their best to reduce murder? when in fact murder rates stay the same?

and how is that even remotely the same as people who are actively trying to help the environment?

first off

you sound like a writeup for a lab I did in intro to geology

and "Small scale" is kind of a relative term when you start to consider the fact that you are creating a lake where there wasn't a lake and removing water downstream and also the disruption of the migration path of any fish that want to swim to another part of the river. (aka salmon and steelhead)

small scale = one lake, one area.

large scale = whole earth

i didnt say it was an awesome thing to do, i just stated that it is the cheapest way to make electricity

I know you think im full of shit, im an asshole, its what assholes do, a good asshole regulates shit instead of just spluttering it everywhere. I admire your actions, im a fan of nuclear power because i want to keep my power hungry lifestyle while doing only a reasonable amount of damage. We need to admit this.

This has been but a very poor ignoble attempt by me at your edification. People love humility, you have to mix this with your pride in such a way as it inspires people to emulate you, we have failings, we're going to admit them and temper them with our endevours. When you act as though it gives you a special licence you'll only alienate.

thanks dad, you set a fine example that i will aspire towards.

:blush: ^rawrr

No probs sp heart dude. *ruffles hair*

good thread.

Mine was for 6 people, now that you guys are splitting it all up