Tidal Power – the future?

Home Forum Chat Forum Tidal Power – the future?

Viewing 41 posts - 91 through 131 (of 131 total)
  • Tidal Power – the future?
  • Premier Icon jam bo
    Subscriber
    TooTall
    Member

    My biggest issue is with energy security

    With complete disregard to the environment. Oh – 100 years for coal doesn’t make that a viable answer for our future energy needs.

    zokes
    Member

    come on Zokes – this is the key drawback to nuclear but one you ignore.

    Feel free to read any of the tedious threads there have been on this topic.

    Kit
    Member

    Oh – 100 years for coal doesn’t make that a viable answer for our future energy needs

    100 years is better than nothing, and that’s 100 years to find (a) viable alternative(s).

    Better reinstated the edited post. then

    stevewhyte – Member

    Nuclear is the same, exept the fuel is running out. And the more countries who move to it the less thee will be, we do not have any fuel in the UK.

    You have never been able to answer this zokes on any thread. I have read them You simply ignore this major drawback as you know there is no answer to it.

    zokes
    Member

    100 years is better than nothing, and that’s 100 years to find (a) viable alternative(s).

    Cool. Nuclear it is then…

    Junkyard
    Member

    Feel free to read any of the tedious threads there have been on this topic.

    Damn I feel like I missed something really really importnant now 😳

    Premier Icon molgrips
    Subscriber

    I understand there’s some argument about whether or not nuclear fuel supplies are as limited as some people claim.

    Premier Icon jam bo
    Subscriber

    I understand there’s some argument about whether or not fossil fuel supplies are as limited as some people claim.

    Premier Icon Drac
    Subscriber

    There are far more alternatives than tidal power.

    [video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8yW5cyXXRc[/video]

    Kit
    Member

    I understand there’s some argument about whether or not fossil fuel supplies are as limited as some people claim.

    Junkyard
    Member

    You have never been able to answer this zokes on any thread. I have read them You simply ignore this major drawback as you know there is no answer to it.

    NO PLEASE GOD NOOOOOOOOOOOO

    It has been done you choose to ignore it. It is not as conclusive as you suggest. No one can answer anything to your satisfaction when you put the TJ head of stubborness on NO ONE

    * PS you usually say this for storage rather than supply. Because you dont like or agree with the answers this does not mean it has not been answered [ it means you dont like /agree with the answer] but I will leave that dance to the dedicated as you explain why your logic has bestested all before it

    zokes
    Member

    but I will leave that dance to the dedicated a syou explain why your logic has bestested all before it

    He already has done. A wave power company used to live in the same building as him. This seems to trump anything us mere mortals with relevant qualifications or industry experience can muster.

    I love TJ logic 🙂

    Junkyard -Not at all. Its not a question of me not liking the answer.

    It is a fact that at current usage there is a few decades of nuclear fuel left and that is as a small % of the worlds energy usage.

    druidh
    Member

    It’s tedious chaps – especially TJ and Zokes (yes Zokes – I blame TJ for invoking your name on this one, but please don’t play the game).

    Here we go – personal attack from Zokes as he is exposed for talking nonsense.

    Sorry Druidh.

    druidh
    Member

    I’m anti-nuke but everything I’ve read suggests that there is no shortage of fissionable material, especially given emerging technologies.

    druidh
    Member

    TandemJeremy – Member
    Here we go – personal attack from Zokes as he is exposed for talking nonsense.

    Err – sorry TJ, but you started it….

    zokes
    Member

    Here we go – personal attack from Zokes as he is exposed for talking nonsense.

    Have a look at the top of Pg2 – I think you’ll find that’s the first mention of my name anywhere on this thread. And lo and behold, it’s an ad hominem attack by your good self.

    Druidh – the nuclear industries own people say around 40 years of known fuel at current usage – this is the issue.

    Zokes – that was a simple prediction – I do not make any attack on you there and lo and behold I was right in my prediction.

    zokes
    Member

    TJ:

    Feel free to read any of the tedious threads there have been on this topic.

    Then read these posts in this thread:

    molgrips – Member

    I understand there’s some argument about whether or not nuclear fuel supplies are as limited as some people claim.

    Junkyard – Member

    NO PLEASE GOD NOOOOOOOOOOOO

    It has been done you choose to ignore it. It is not as conclusive as you suggest. No one can answer anything to your satisfaction when you put the TJ head of stubborness on NO ONE

    So then – yo still have no answer to this Zokes. I’ll leave it at that with the major flaw in your pro nuclear evangelisicm exposed.

    By the nuclear industries own figures there is a few decades of fuel available at current usage rates. Thus nuclear can never be more than a bit part player in the worlds energy consumption

    zokes
    Member

    Zokes – that was a simple prediction – I do not make any attack on you there and lo and behold I was right in my prediction.

    Well, instead of bringing what was quite an interesting thread down to the predictable dirge with your negative use – deliberately trolling with a loaded statement, why didn’t you just exalt the virtues of tidal turbines? Like I did?

    alex222
    Member

    It is a fact that at current usage there is a few decades of nuclear fuel left

    Playing the game now but; where do you get that information from? I don’t think that you can just make a statement like that with no peer approved study or even peer reviewed study to back it up.

    Premier Icon molgrips
    Subscriber

    It is a fact that at current usage there is a few decades of nuclear fuel left

    I wonder what the ROI on a nuclear power plant is and over what time period? And if the companies that build them are aware of the limited fuel supplies?

    zokes
    Member

    TandemJeremy – Member
    So then – yo still have no answer to this Zokes. I’ll leave it at that with the major flaw in your pro nuclear evangelisicm exposed.

    Where have I been evangelical about anything on this thread, apart from the need to build renewables?

    I’ve even praised your logic, and you’re still not happy!

    druidh
    Member

    Thorium.

    Relatively abundant. More efficient than Uranium. Less waste. Shorter half-life (as radioactive as ash after 500 years). Can’t be made into bombs.

    zokes
    Member

    druidh – Member
    Thorium.
    Abundant. More efficient than Uranium. less waste. Shorter half-life. Can’t be made into bombs.

    Unproved tech, can’t be done, includes the worrd NUCLEAR 😉

    C’mon now, I think we know how this works!

    druidh – Member

    Thorium.
    Abundant. More efficient than Uranium. less waste. Shorter half-life. Can’t be made into bombs.

    Be great if it works and well worth the research into it. Unproven and experimental as yet.

    druidh
    Member

    TandemJeremy – Member

    Tidal Power

    Be great if it works and well worth the research into it. Unproven and experimental as yet.FTFY

    zokes
    Member

    PMSL!!! 😆

    includes the worrd NUCLEAR

    ~Again you try to portray me as a luddite scared of nuclear when actually that is not my position.

    I know you have to do this as I have exposed the massive flaws in your pro nuclear attitude but it really is tiresome.

    legend
    Member

    Oh good, a (potentially interesting) thread about tidal power than gets turned into a nuclear debate by the usual retards – joy!

    zokes
    Member

    ~Again you try to portray me as a luddite scared of nuclear when actually that is not my position.

    Find your name in that post.

    I don’t think you’ll find you were mentioned. But that you associated yourself with it speaks volumes…

    I have exposed the massive flaws in your pro nuclear attitude but it really is tiresome.

    Try reading

    Premier Icon molgrips
    Subscriber

    TJ JUST STOP

    I can feel the banhammer descending on me so I have to walk away.

    Sorry for the disruption on the thread.

    Zokes – I have clearly exposed massive flaws in your pro nuclear stance and you simply refuse to answer them preferring to mock and belittle showing the paucity of your arguemnt

    Kit
    Member

    I don’t think you’ll find you were mentioned. But that you associated yourself with it speaks volumes…

    zokes, you’re bordering on trolling now. I that’s the polite way of putting it.

    zokes
    Member

    Zokes – I have clearly exposed massive flaws in your pro nuclear stance and you simply refuse to answer them preferring to mock and belittle showing the paucity of your arguemnt

    I reiterate: Try reading

    If you think that’s evangelistic of nuclear, then you need your head seeing to.

Viewing 41 posts - 91 through 131 (of 131 total)

The topic ‘Tidal Power – the future?’ is closed to new replies.