Quote:
Originally Posted by Phalanx
Actually, our climates are remarkably similar. It gets a bit colder here in the winter, but not by much (average highs are about the same, we just have lower lows). So a bit more snow, but our conditions are not extremely different by any measure. They get hurricanes about as often as we do.
Anyway, all of that is moot because wind turbines are already demonstrably working here. Other places with turbines have to deal with high winds and storm situations, and turbines typically aren't built where conditions do not permit. Again, I'll leave it to people far more knowledgeable in these things to figure out, and they already seem to think it's workable, so there you go.
And nuclear waste is always a problem. Yes, there are lots of storage options, but they all require long term and intensive monitoring. And while it doesn't happen often, things can and do go wrong with storage...
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...0HE03020140919
And then you have good old human error and indifference...
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26658719
So brush it off as fear mongering all you want, but there are many practical problems with nuclear waste. Not something I want to have to put blind faith in for the next few (24k) years.
|
I agree.
I don't think anybody has come up with a reliable way to store nuclear waste for tens of thousands of years... if they said they did I'm afraid I'd have to call BS.
I'm not sure what their target life is but at some point the containment areas will have to be safely repaired/refurbished/replaced. There is a financial cost related to that as well as an environmental/ethical cost should anything go wrong.
For the life of me, I can't understand why we would want to burden our descendants with having to deal with this for hundreds of generations to come. Cripes, what we've already done to the planet through our consuming other forms of stored energy is bad enough...