Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

This energy source could solve all of our problems Ś so why is no one talking about it?
The Week ^ | March 4, 2014 | Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry

Posted on 03/05/2014 2:03:32 PM PST by kingattax

Energy is arguably the single most important strategic issue of our time. It literally powers everything we do. The world economy see-saws to the gyrations of oil prices. Most of our geopolitical squabbles are about energy in one way or another. And, of course, above all hovers the threatening Armageddon of global climate change.

But when it comes to energy, you probably don't know who, or what, to trust. Clean energy! No, wait, that doesn't work! (And what does that mean, exactly?) Shale gas! No, wait, you will pollute everything.

There's a band of hipsters within the community of people who think hard about energy who think this is a bunch of hoo-ha. We already have a perfectly useful and clean energy source, they say: nuclear power.

In terms of its capacity, nuclear power could provide almost all of our energy needs. In terms of carbon emissions, nuclear power is totally clean. Outside of a handful of countries whose names you probably already know, proliferation isn't an issue. Of course, there's the issue of safety.

But nuclear power is safe, advocates say. Chernobyl happened because of the insanity of communism, and Fukushima because you probably shouldn't build reactors on the path of tsunamis, not because of anything inherent to nuclear power. The solution to nuclear waste, they say, is more R&D, so that waste can be recycled.

Look at France! It draws almost all of its energy from nuclear power, with no serious incident to note in the past 50 years, and the power is cheap, plentiful, and clean.

(Excerpt) Read more at theweek.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: energy; nuclear
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last
too bad we can't have a president and a congress that has a clear vision of how the correct energy policy would give us a commanding strategic advantage militarily and economically and cement America's status as THE world's superpower.
1 posted on 03/05/2014 2:03:32 PM PST by kingattax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Oooh, but what about the China Syndrome?... Goobers all.


2 posted on 03/05/2014 2:07:51 PM PST by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Yay, yet another article about Thorium.


3 posted on 03/05/2014 2:08:26 PM PST by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

Solving problems is not what we’re about anymore...
You’d think the oil companies would be in the building nuke plants since we’re running out of oil ...?


4 posted on 03/05/2014 2:09:48 PM PST by ▀udda▀udd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative

TMI was a success story. Contained even when it hit the fan.


5 posted on 03/05/2014 2:10:13 PM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

The Rats and Obama don’t want thorium reactors because there are no political gains in getting us to be energy independent.


6 posted on 03/05/2014 2:13:30 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (Haven't you lost enough freedoms? Support an end to the WOD now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

You must be stuck in the energy polices of the 50’s (sez 0bama).


7 posted on 03/05/2014 2:15:33 PM PST by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

The hardest reasons of all to overcome are the political. I personally don’t want to stand in the way of any “real” effective energy production.

My personal crusade is to repower some of the thousands of dams in this country that are just wasting readily available energy now. Its green, its proven, and it works every day, all day.


8 posted on 03/05/2014 2:16:15 PM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

All US resources, under the undocumented Indonesian Impostor,
are SOLELY for al Qaeda, Islam, except because he is
“more flexible” he also just sent 1 billion
dollars to Russia (through Jacques Kerry and Ukraine).


9 posted on 03/05/2014 2:18:26 PM PST by Diogenesis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative

>Oooh, but what about the China Syndrome?

Not a problem. Any meltdown that attempted to make its way to China would simply stop at the center of the Earth. Gravity being what it is and all. Plus, it’s already hot there, so a little more heat won’t matter.


10 posted on 03/05/2014 2:25:09 PM PST by soycd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

I won’t trust nuclear power until the power companies pay for their own insurance coverage rather than taxpayer liability.


11 posted on 03/05/2014 2:30:14 PM PST by 867V309 (Obammy = LIAR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney
Yeah, Ok.
12 posted on 03/05/2014 2:37:40 PM PST by logi_cal869
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: kingattax
There are several promising emerging nuclear technologies that don't share the safety problems with current generation reactors and that have a number of other advantages. These include Thorium, Molten Salt Reactors (e.g. Transatomic Power Corporation), Micro Nuclear (TerraPower, Hyperion, and many others). There are even several long shots include various forms of Fusion from inertial, toroidal, and even the very long shot of aneutronic (Lawrenceville Plasma Physics and others).

Any sane national energy policy would direct resource towards advancing a portfolio of these technologies rather than wind, solar, and other currently fashionable but otherwise inefficient and environmentally dubious approaches.

If we don't innovate, other countries surely will.

13 posted on 03/05/2014 2:40:30 PM PST by Jeff F
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 867V309

If red tape, regulations and environmental impact reports weren’t an issue I’ll bet a consortium of investors could successfully get a nuke plant up and producing energy within 5 years and be able to turn a profit without any subsidies of any kind.


14 posted on 03/05/2014 2:40:50 PM PST by Two Kids' Dad (((( Give free market capitalism a chance ))))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

I thought this article would be about stupidity. It’s abundant and renewable, and could be tapped for an unlimited source of energy, if we had the technology. Too bad we’re using it to prevent new sources from coming on line (i.e. liberalism run amok).


15 posted on 03/05/2014 2:42:35 PM PST by Disambiguator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff F

Thanks for your post. Whichever way this country goes, it needs to involve weaning ourselves off of middle eastern oil and providing alternatives for other countries to do the same.


16 posted on 03/05/2014 2:43:16 PM PST by Two Kids' Dad (((( Give free market capitalism a chance ))))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: logi_cal869

From your link:

Just how serious was the accident? Based on our investigation of the health effects of the accident, we conclude that in spite of serious damage to the plant, most of the radiation was contained and the actual release will have a negligible effect on the physical health of individuals. The major health effect of the accident was found to be mental stress.


17 posted on 03/05/2014 2:57:43 PM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

The operating nuclear reactors in the US are all decades old and because of anti nuclear hysteria no new plants have been built. Clearly better nuclear technology has been developed in the last 50 years that could be applied to make nuclear power, safe, cheap, clean and reliable.


18 posted on 03/05/2014 3:13:18 PM PST by The Great RJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

A logical energy policy for America would involve nuclear power and hydro for electricity. Then natural gas and oil could be used mainly for heating and transportation.

We could be energy-independent in a couple of years if we wanted to. Of course, it looks like we’re headed that way anyway, due entirely to private industry, but in perhaps 10 years.


19 posted on 03/05/2014 3:19:33 PM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingattax

So true...nuclear is a great energy source.


20 posted on 03/05/2014 3:34:08 PM PST by ExCTCitizen (2014: The Year of DEAD RINOS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-38 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson