The Forum > Article Comments > Is nuclear the solution to climate change? > Comments
Is nuclear the solution to climate change? : Comments
By Scott Ludlam, published 29/3/2010Nuclear power would at best be a distraction and a delay on the path to a sustainable future.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Page 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- ...
- 25
- 26
- 27
-
- All
Posted by qanda, Friday, 9 April 2010 7:20:44 AM
| |
qanda, re:
"Sir Vivor, do you understand the Statutes of the International Atomic Energy Agency?" Likely no better than the average, tertiary-educated Vanuatuan, But I assume I can read them, although I expect I might miss a few of the subtler nuances and implications. Can you post a link? Perhaps also you could say your thing, succinctly, on the really important bit(s); the IAEA Statute(s) that transmute(s) my hypothetical into a straw man. Posted by Sir Vivor, Friday, 9 April 2010 8:11:49 AM
| |
Sir Vivor
I have already posted a link to the IAEA, here it is again: http://www.iaea.org/About/index.html Please, explore it ... you will find the Statutes there. There are alternative solutions to energy supply for small island states other than nuclear power, or fossil fuels. I will ask again: What do you suggest we do with the existing (and growing) stockpile of nuclear waste? Posted by qanda, Friday, 9 April 2010 7:26:09 PM
| |
Quanda,
You say "There are alternative solutions to energy supply for small island states other than nuclear power, or fossil fuels." Pray do tell. The single biggest problem with renewable power is that it is unreliable, and while the holy grail is to find a renewable base load supply, there is no answer yet. The answer to waste is, as France is doing, is reprocess, re enrich and reuse as much as possible. Posted by Shadow Minister, Saturday, 10 April 2010 6:16:34 AM
| |
For small island states, renewables with diesel generator backup probably makes good sense. The big hope for these places is to have processes to convert organic waste directly into fuel.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/l3728547068h487n/ Posted by Fester, Saturday, 10 April 2010 9:05:39 AM
| |
Fester, you say that
"For small island states, renewables with diesel generator backup probably makes good sense." I assume you mean that the organic waste gets converted into fuel, and the fuel is used to generate electricity. Are you also saying that Gen IV reactors do not make good sense for small island states? Why not? Shadow minister, you say that "The single biggest problem with renewable power is that it is unreliable, and while the holy grail is to find a renewable base load supply, there is no answer yet." Is this a problem not solved for a small island state by providing it with Gen IV nuclear electricity? My question, though, in a nutshell, is what do Tasmania or Vanuatu do with the waste from a Gen IV reactor, including the superannuated reactor? qanda, you will have to forgive me my tardiness and inattention regarding your link to the IAEA. I will try to get around to reading the IAEA statutes by next Friday, but I expect it will be a hard slog. Do you know of any websites that do a quick, crisp exegesis of this body of law? Do you have a blog I could visit? I ask: "Ignoring absolutely, absolutely every other consideration, except "effective international control and supervision", which we will assume is indeed effective, what is your ideal plan to manage and sequester the inevitable radwaste? Fester, Shadow Minister and qanda, can any of you spell it out for the rest of us in 250 words or less? And qanda, you plainly understand to your own satisfaction what you are talking about, in the way the IAES statutes apply to my hypothetical. Can you help me to understand, or are you satisfied simply to insist that I read something of unknown merit, regarding my waste disposal concerns? Posted by Sir Vivor, Saturday, 10 April 2010 12:05:41 PM
|
Your hypothetical strawman will not eventuate.
What do you suggest we do with the existing (and growing) stockpile of nuclear waste?