Subject: Nuclear power debate: yes or no?

Read this for a scientific view of the Japanese reactor issue, instead of relying on sensationalist media sources.

Nuclear energy is a divisive topic, and frankly the reactions to it are often the same as those from people who are against vaccination: emotional knee-jerk responses due to a lack of reliable information, and an insistence on not properly educating oneself about the issue.

I read that article too, but what makes you think he is indeed a reliable source? No one of us except the people who build that plant can safely confirm that.

Dr Josef Oehmen, a research scientist at MIT, in Boston. He is a PhD Scientist, whose father has extensive experience in Germany’s nuclear industry.

If he was erroneous in his explanation, I'm sure there are no lack of informed sources to debunk his explanation.

Can you show me one?

No one of us except the people who build that plant can safely confirm that.

Actually, someone with an engineering background from the industry with knowledge of the way the plant was built, can give a pretty good explanation. If a car fails to work, it is not only the manufacturer who can tell us why it doesn't work.

Also, there have been 0/ZERO deaths due to radiation during this disaster in Japan.

But you wouldn't know it from the news sources.

It looks like it could be true, you still cant proof that, you dont have any way of knowing wether this article is right or the media. Unless you build that plant or are an expert for nuclear power plants. Thats my point:)
(edited)

The EU (and in fact the whole world) should go for nuclear fusion. Zero emission(if the process is optimized) and a huge amount of energy.

That is obviously the plan, but it can take 50 years or longer to reach that point.

In 2010 there was a project started in france by european countries to achive that goal.

Before i graduated(2 years ago) my psysics teacher evaluated the latest technology.

They were able to fuse atoms but they had to put in as much energy then they recovered.
So optimize the process and bingo isn't it =p?

Well I just checked the source agan, seems like they have some issues financing the project called ITER, so...

They are also saying a commercial use before 2050 is very unlikely. And commercial use is what is needed not just the pure ability to fuse atoms.

Why does it take so long, why doens't the EU (or the UN) supports this plan?

Damned do we have to mention you can build enormous weapons with this technology before the americans/chinese/.. are interested in investing in this?

Actually Eu seems to be interested but is quite expensive and even greenpace is saying by the time it has reached commercial usage alternative energysources like wind, sun and water can allready replace nuclear power for the whole planet.

Well thats what some studies are saying , so in theory it looks like that.

So that seems to be the reason of some doubts.

Come on. Yesterday in Belgium there was almost no wind, no sun and no rain.

Those 3 are only possible when the electric net is european and still..
I think an extra effort towards fusion wouldn't be a bad move.

Yesterday in Belgium there was almost no wind, no sun and no rain.

I'm sorry, but I'm seeing a lack of relevance here. Et alors?

Solar energy = production is low when the sky is clouded
wind energy = no wind, no energy
no rain/no waterfall/small coast = production is low on hydro energy

relevance = belgium needs an alternative energy source then these. Nuclear fusion maybe.

Savvie? ;)
(edited)

Also, there have been 0/ZERO deaths due to radiation during this disaster in Japan.

But you wouldn't know it from the news sources.

Radioactivity kills on a long-term period. Most of the media report that a gorgeous cloud of Caesium 137 is flying over Japan, now. Half-life 30 years, decay time who can say.

I think an extra effort towards fusion wouldn't be a bad move.

Difficult, while governments and corporations have invested on nuclear fission for fifty years. And still they do. Fusion is not a core business, is it?