Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Current Events Current Events Forum - Latest political news and events


Thanks Tree7Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old February 24th, 2013, 06:13 AM   #11
Banned
 
Truth Detector's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Ventura CA
Posts: 7,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by intangible child View Post
This is the world of irony for the Progressive Liberal mindset; you can't use coal cause it is dirty, you can't use oil cause it is dirty, you can't damn lakes cause that harms nature and you cant use nuclear because that's too risky and dirty.

What's left? Nothing but the most inefficient ugly eyesores one can imagine; massive slabs of ugly black solar panels or a forest of ugly windmills.

Forget the fact that the most efficient and renewable source of fairly clean power is nuclear and actually works, we would rather have the view from our homes and businesses obscured by unsightly solar panels and windmills.
Truth Detector is offline  
Old February 24th, 2013, 06:24 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 60,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
This is the world of irony for the Progressive Liberal mindset; you can't use coal cause it is dirty, you can't use oil cause it is dirty, you can't damn lakes cause that harms nature and you cant use nuclear because that's too risky and dirty.

What's left? Nothing but the most inefficient ugly eyesores one can imagine; massive slabs of ugly black solar panels or a forest of ugly windmills.

Forget the fact that the most efficient and renewable source of fairly clean power is nuclear and actually works, we would rather have the view from our homes and businesses obscured by unsightly solar panels and windmills.
Oh hell, oh hell no let's not spoil the view from your home or business.

Let's keep creating additional nuclear waste. I mean, some of it has already seeped into the ground and needs replacing.

Sarcasm aside, we'd have a heck of a lot less nuclear waste if we built breeder reactors. And, keep in mind, that the majority of high-level nuclear waste was a by-product of weapons production.

Done correctly, I don't have a problems with nukes built away from natural disaster exposure.
imaginethat is offline  
Old February 24th, 2013, 03:51 PM   #13
I'm debt free
 
TNVolunteer73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Lebanon, TN
Posts: 36,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
Oh hell, oh hell no let's not spoil the view from your home or business.

Let's keep creating additional nuclear waste. I mean, some of it has already seeped into the ground and needs replacing.

Sarcasm aside, we'd have a heck of a lot less nuclear waste if we built breeder reactors. And, keep in mind, that the majority of high-level nuclear waste was a by-product of weapons production.

Done correctly, I don't have a problems with nukes built away from natural disaster exposure.
You cannot blame Private Nuclear plants with the actions of governent. this is a Government facility. and as we know Government DOES NOT follow the laws it put on everyone else.
TNVolunteer73 is offline  
Old February 24th, 2013, 08:18 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 60,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
You cannot blame Private Nuclear plants with the actions of governent. this is a Government facility. and as we know Government DOES NOT follow the laws it put on everyone else.
True but....

It was a nuclear arms race.

As much as this is correct to say, we won.
imaginethat is offline  
Old February 24th, 2013, 10:55 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
intangible child's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 12,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
This is the world of irony for the Progressive Liberal mindset; you can't use coal cause it is dirty, you can't use oil cause it is dirty, you can't damn lakes cause that harms nature and you cant use nuclear because that's too risky and dirty.

What's left? Nothing but the most inefficient ugly eyesores one can imagine; massive slabs of ugly black solar panels or a forest of ugly windmills.

Forget the fact that the most efficient and renewable source of fairly clean power is nuclear and actually works, we would rather have the view from our homes and businesses obscured by unsightly solar panels and windmills.
Isn't this pretty?

Coal-fired power plants and pollution | PARTHA DAS SHARMA's Weblog on "Keeping World Environment Safer and Greener"


Oil Spills


Pictures of Pollution
intangible child is offline  
Old February 24th, 2013, 11:17 PM   #16
I'm debt free
 
TNVolunteer73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Lebanon, TN
Posts: 36,319
That is why we want a pipeline so we dont see oil spills in the ocean.

That is why GW Bush began implemnting CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY.
TNVolunteer73 is offline  
Old February 24th, 2013, 11:19 PM   #17
I'm debt free
 
TNVolunteer73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Lebanon, TN
Posts: 36,319
TNVolunteer73 is offline  
Old February 24th, 2013, 11:34 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
intangible child's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 12,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
That is why we want a pipeline so we dont see oil spills in the ocean.

That is why GW Bush began implemnting CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY.
Enbridge's 318,000 barrel per day Line 14 pipeline, part of the Lakehead system, was shut after an estimated 1,200 barrels of oil were leaked. This happened almost two years to the day after another major spill in a different section of the line, in Michigan.
U.S. pipeline agency probes Enbridge oil spill in Wisconsin | Reuters

Clean coal is a newspeak word and oxymoron used to encourage people to focus on coal as a source of energy, generally as a supplement to oil. In theory, new production technologies "burn" the coal "cleaner" than before, and harness more energy per lb than with prior technologies. CO2 is still released into the atmosphere so "clean" does not mean carbon neutral, but sulfurous impurities can be dramatically cut using "clean" coal.

The issue is more complex than both those against the use of coal and those who favour coal. "Clean coal" is strictly a marketing term used by the coal industry. In actuality, the idea behind clean coal is sequestering carbon emissions from coal plants, which will then be buried underground "for eternity". However eternity is a long time and the technology is still in the development phase. In fact, burying the CO2 underground is a bigger problem than permanent disposal of nuclear waste: CO2 is a water-soluble gas rather than a chemically inert, insoluble solid and requires storage for an infinitely longer period of time.



intangible child is offline  
Old February 24th, 2013, 11:53 PM   #19
I'm debt free
 
TNVolunteer73's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Lebanon, TN
Posts: 36,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by intangible child View Post
Enbridge's 318,000 barrel per day Line 14 pipeline, part of the Lakehead system, was shut after an estimated 1,200 barrels of oil were leaked. This happened almost two years to the day after another major spill in a different section of the line, in Michigan.
U.S. pipeline agency probes Enbridge oil spill in Wisconsin | Reuters

Clean coal is a newspeak word and oxymoron used to encourage people to focus on coal as a source of energy, generally as a supplement to oil. In theory, new production technologies "burn" the coal "cleaner" than before, and harness more energy per lb than with prior technologies. CO2 is still released into the atmosphere so "clean" does not mean carbon neutral, but sulfurous impurities can be dramatically cut using "clean" coal.

The issue is more complex than both those against the use of coal and those who favour coal. "Clean coal" is strictly a marketing term used by the coal industry. In actuality, the idea behind clean coal is sequestering carbon emissions from coal plants, which will then be buried underground "for eternity". However eternity is a long time and the technology is still in the development phase. In fact, burying the CO2 underground is a bigger problem than permanent disposal of nuclear waste: CO2 is a water-soluble gas rather than a chemically inert, insoluble solid and requires storage for an infinitely longer period of time.



At Arnold Engineering in Tullahoma, Coal Liquifiation has been used sincethe 1960s
TNVolunteer73 is offline  
Old February 25th, 2013, 12:02 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
intangible child's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: California
Posts: 12,699
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
At Arnold Engineering in Tullahoma, Coal Liquifiation has been used sincethe 1960s
I believe it!

intangible child is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Tags
hanford, leaking, nuclear, tanks, underground



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Radioactive Tritium Leaking From 20 Usa Nuclear Plants intangible child Healthcare 2 June 29th, 2011 03:40 PM
Unexplained 12,000 Year Old Underground City Dude111 World History 15 March 14th, 2011 09:36 AM
Assange Leaking On Russia, Too imaginethat Politicians 7 December 30th, 2010 11:44 PM
CIA chief: No more leaking CNN Current Events 4 November 9th, 2010 04:10 AM
Pakistani tanks run from Taliban. Thanks Bush! hevusa Warfare 3 March 14th, 2009 05:59 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.