US is the no. 1 polluter in the world

[CaptainHaplo]

Neal - I can answer that.

We are #1 in nuclear waste - though "pollution" is a stretch because our waste gets buried in Yucca Mountain where it won't harm the environment. But I guess one could say that its existance equals pollution.

However the real crime against humanity comes from the fact that our philosophy of self determination, independance and a refusal to embrace global collectivism means our views, ideals and way of life is the largest possible "pollutant" to many people like OTH.

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

Neal - I can answer that.

We are #1 in nuclear waste - though "pollution" is a stretch because our waste gets buried in Yucca Mountain where it won't harm the environment. But I guess one could say that its existance equals pollution.

However the real crime against humanity comes from the fact that our philosophy of self determination, independance and a refusal to embrace global collectivism means our views, ideals and way of life is the largest possible "pollutant" to many people like OTH.

I guess scale is the issue here, what scale do various nations operate with. As far as nuclear power plants, the Soviets already had one accident. I haven't yet been convinced by the end storage systems and facilities in any country. Yes, Finland buries it's nuclear waste in some bed rock somewhere but it's a matter of debate.

How can we know there's not earthquakes or some kind of cracks in the earths core or some similar type system that might rupture the nuclear waste storage. Nuclear waste stays 'live' for millenia so I'd say it's a cause for concern.

The US produces the most nuclear waste but I haven't yet found a reliable list. This one doesn't have Russia in it so it's probably not 100% correct.

Ok according to this Russia is no. 5 but the emerging eastern economies are catching up to the west fast.

And as far as do I have problem with the US 'way of life', yea I guess I do. Partly because Finland is said to be most like the US in Europe in that we brainlessly emulate the States in almost everything. I've even seen some Hummers in the streets.

[CaptainHaplo]

OTH - now we are getting somewhere.

What exactly about the US "way of life" do you have a problem with? If you can give specifics - without turning it into an attack, I can try to represent why it can - and often (but not always) is a good thing. If you want, we can do it in a PM if you are worried that it might cause a negative reaction from the mods.

Your point on radioactive waste is a perfect example of how to present issues. Its not just a US problem - though as the biggest producer we do need to be concerned over the waste that gets put underground. I agree we need to have a better solution. In fact - better solutions are out there. European technological breakthroughs (I forget which European country did it) devised reactors that are much more efficient in their fuel use, and the end "waste" products decays in something like a decade. I read about it in Wired magazine - but don't have a link. It was a couple of years ago I think. Anyway, this style of reactor, though it does put out slightly less energy due to its design, in the end uses like 99.5% of the potential of the fuel - meaning the waste is almost non-existant compared to the reactors in use today.

The problem with its adoption in the US is two-fold. One is capitalism - because the design costs about twice as much to build than a "standard" reactor. Since the initial cost is so high, and the return via energy output is lower, the power generation industry is not screaming for it. I will grant that this style also would save them money in the long run on waste disposal. It is also worth noting that the waste, being so drained of energy - is also no longer capable of being enriched into weapons grade, meaning that it removes a big issue in proliferation.

The second problem is the environmental lobby in the US. Every nuclear plant proposal is met with an onslaught of environmentalists out to stop it - regardless of how safe and clean it can be. Just as a corporation has the knee jerk reaction to "hoard wealth" - the environmentalists have the knee jerk reaction of "no nukes". The fight becomes too hard to actually build a clean source of energy, so it never happens.

Both sides stand in the way of progress. See - I can criticize our system too. Its not perfect - and no - corporations don't just need a free ride to do what they want. There needs to be a level of regulation, just as there needs to be some common sense applied when a clean and safe source of energy is available.

CH,

what do I have problem with US specifically? I don't think there is any single issue. I think in Europe the UK and possibly Ireland are the closest to the States for obvious reasons, language and culture. The continental Europe is much less connected to the States and could be seen to be more hostile toward the US and things it represents. I don't think it's necessarily a problem of the continental Europe, I think the US is responsible for this state of affairs. My opinions only represent this status quo.

Ok I'm moving on the third point on my list, solid waste. Have been looking at several links but can't find definite comparison of the world's top producers of solid waste. According to one link US was the no. 1 until 2004 when China passed it. Or again, if there was a sample of who has been the no. 1 producer of solid waste during the last 10 years it might very well be US.

Haven't yet found any definite lists about top producers of liquid waste either but since they are often linked to oil products I wouldn't be surprised if US placed high on that list also.

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

OTH - now we are getting somewhere.

Your point on radioactive waste is a perfect example of how to present issues. Its not just a US problem - though as the biggest producer we do need to be concerned over the waste that gets put underground. I agree we need to have a better solution. In fact - better solutions are out there. European technological breakthroughs (I forget which European country did it) devised reactors that are much more efficient in their fuel use, and the end "waste" products decays in something like a decade. I read about it in Wired magazine - but don't have a link. It was a couple of years ago I think. Anyway, this style of reactor, though it does put out slightly less energy due to its design, in the end uses like 99.5% of the potential of the fuel - meaning the waste is almost non-existant compared to the reactors in use today.

Pleasantly surprised. We certainly are getting somewhere.

Very educational post. Although I'm not a supporter of nuclear energy, this is extremely positive news. This kind of technology is definately food for thought.

It's a-bit surprising USA hasn't made more of an effort towards wind power. The price is definately right, and there are no fuel transport costs either.

[AVGWarhawk]

It's a-bit surprising USA hasn't made more of an effort towards wind power

It is coming! Plenty in the mid-west. Here is on problem and it is just stupid. Some of these mills were proposed to be installed off the coast of Marth's Vineyard. Well, we know the Kennedy's reside there and they felt that their view of the ocean would be spoiled by these mills. The project scrapped. There was one case of a town that said the mills gave them migraine headaches or something like that. You can hear them woosh woosh of the blades. There was one program I watched were a small town installed a mill and this mill provided electricity for all in the town. That is a good success story. Mills are just part of the overall picture but certainly a part. I think looking at ocean currents and wave action as the energy to turn turbine needs to be looked at more closely.

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Mills are just part of the overall picture but certainly a part.

Very true. Danmark is big on wind power, while Norway is big on water power.
When one has an excess of electricity they send it to the other. It works realy well.
Danmark doesn't import any oil, and Norway is an oil exporter.

[AVGWarhawk]

We do have the dams. Hoover Dam for electricity and water supply. But that even comes at a price to the environment. For this to work there needs to be a culmination of all types of energy to make any sense.

[CaptainHaplo]

Wind power - in places - is feasible. However it has a number of obstacles here in the states. Some people consider it "unsightly" (I'd rather have electricity than a view personally), the wind doesn't always blow, you have acute standards on how to get the energy onto the grid in a usuable form, etc. I honestly doubt wind is a long range answer - but its foolish not to use it where its appropriate.

The reality is - when it comes to nuclear power - we have the technology and ability to make it "walk away" safe - as in you could walk away for a pizza. A perfect example is the chinese HT-10 reactor - a Pebble Bed design.

The only problem with that design is the waste, being encase in graphite pebbles, creates more volume for the same amount of waste. However, a rollback of the reproccessing rules (that originated with President Peanut... I mean uh.... Carter) would allow for a drastic reduction in waste.

After doing some research, my memory has been refreshed - it is not a new nuclear plant design that provides the increased efficiency, it is the continual reprocessing of the fuel that results in it being used until inert. Basically, old fuel in, new fuel out, in a safe and controlled fashion. The fissionable material (aka the nuke fuel) is seperated from the mass that is no longer usuable for fuel. Without reprocessing, about 95% of the energy in a modern fuel rod is unused when it is "spent". With reprocessing, you can continually strip away the unusable portion and continue to use the fuel source.

France for example, uses reprocessing to not only fuel its standard reactors, but also to fuel its MOX style reactors.

Combine reprocessing with a reactor that by design is inherently safe, and you have a clean, safe source of energy. And another bonus - the Pebble Bed design can be used to create hydrogen in the vast quantities economies would need to move from petroleum to hydrogen.