Page 3 - Nuclear Power

I agree somewhat.. I certainly do not look foward to oil running out, as not all plastics are recycable. What we should do, is start using disposable plastic items (supermarket bags and shit) made of plastics derived from corn.
Although ideas like that seem stupid, this is just a result of our culture.

Just too burst your bubble, in an effort to achieve greater efficiency, and to fufil the "joe six pack" urge for beefy cars, hydrogen based fuels will probably be filled with other pollutants, probably something nastily acidic.

I don't forsee hydrogen being used as a fuel. Sure fuel cells work, but the pressures they have to be compressed into a liquid to be usable are enormous...and when a gas is compressed into a liquid, it evaporates even in a sealed container. Liquid N is a good example of such a thing. Solar panels work - it's just that people haven't quite gotten the possibilities of einstein's Photoelectric effect (driving force in teh panels). What may be interesting to do is (if) they build that space elevator, run a giant superconducting cable through the center of it, put solar panels into space, and power the earth with such a cable.

Yes it's cheaper at the moment, but think of how much has been spent and will continue to be spent fighting wars over the last few drops of oil. That cost comes to even more still when you come to the point in time when oil has all but run out and the world has done nothing to prepare for a transition to something else. Then, instead of having 30 years of research and implementation under your belt, it all has to be done in 5 or the very threads of society are severed.

I don't care what the alternative is, or how its accomplished, as long as it isn't something like coal, which is even worse for the environment than oil, or something that might have unforseen consequences, like hydrogen--which is why I think solar should become a priority.

Yeah, I didn't think about the corrosiveness of sand...but whoever said "put enough money into a problem and it WILL be solved" is right. I'd rather see that money put to use now, before I have to start paying taxes to fund it

Huh? Rockets burn hydrogen fuel because it burns really well and produces a lot of power... If we were to start mixing it, it would do nothing but dilute it... Joe Six Pack can happily drive along with a hydrogen filled car and get his power :-) And while the evaporation may be a problem, I don't know how fast this stuff evaporates... I'm sure it would all be gone by the end of a year, but again, how long it takes, I don't know. I forsee hydrogen being the solution to our problems. It is in effect, if we can get past a couple of hurdles, the "perfect fuel".

"the perfect fuel"...sounds slightly like an oxymoron. I still say research tesla. He knew what he was doing - and so did the people who made machines that do similar things.

I'll be a killjoy for a moment...What happens when the levels of Hydrogen is the atmosphere start to rise?

Which brings us back to Nuclear power being the best option....

--mrps2man:

That was a hypothetical situation which I think would be quite likley, the problem with capatalism is freedom, business's often ignore mistakes of the past, and should they stumble upon a solution (was going to say catalyst but that would be technically incorrect) which was able to increase the speed, acceleration and handling of the car, which also polluted (pollution does not have to be C02 emmisions) such gases like sulpher, we'd merely have a new problem on our hands.

hydrogen is flammable, so when the levels start to rise, the hydrogen will combust, forming water. no harm done

At the moment nuclear is, but I still think that solar is our best bet in the long run: it carries absolutely no risk. No risk of meltdown, no risk of improper disposal, no risk of in the future, humans not understanding the "Hazardous Waste" signs at Yucca Mountain and breaking into the container of all our radioactive waste. (Although that is an extreme example...just slightly.)

It won't cause a massive Hindenburg in the atmosphere? Ingorance question, no chemistry under my belt yet.

no, the hindenburg was a giant baloon of hydrogen - the atmosphere is so large that it's highly unlikely that using hydrogen and releasing it into the atmosphere will cause any difference. Course I'm not a scientist....

But if Hydrogen became the main soure of energy just as much would be released into the atmosphere as CO2--in other words, alot.

where does the c02 come from? there's no carbon in the hydrogen reaction. it's hydrogen + oxygen = water and electricity. no pollution

I see your point, but the amount of waste involved in nuclear power isn't that great, sure it's dangerous if mishandled, but one of the reasons Tony Blair recently put Nuclear power on the British Political agenda, is because such as the improvements are, nuclear power is now considerably safer. One of the main dangers of nuclear fallout from a meltdown is radioactive iodine entering the blood stream and contaminating the host. Radioactivity is all around us, and it's only certain types that can damage us, I believe this type is alpha, and is made up of hyrdogen atoms (or some sort of derivative), the reason it's dangerous is because if it gets past the skin (which usually protects us from it) say, by means of inhaling contaminated air, the particles can change the molecular composition of our cells, thus causing cancer. In the UK, a nuclear plant called sizewell B has a village adjacent, and each villager has been issued with are issued with potassium iodide tablets, which load the thyroid with iodine to stop it taking in radioactive iodine in the event of a Nuclear meltdown.

It's all doom and gloom, but in reality, those who work in nuclear plants are naturally going to protect thier own safety, and inherently everyone elses.

Oil is a hydrocarbon; it is made up of carbon atoms and hydrogen atoms, these are distilled or something into long and short chain hydrocarbons. Short chain hydrocarbons are less dense and more volatile than long chain hydrocarbons. the short chained hydrocarbons make up things like gas and petrol, while the longer ones are used in the gunk for roads.
these hydrocarbons burn, and when they burn they release hydrogen and carbon, they require hydrogen to burn, and thus co2 and h20 are formed. burning hydrogen produces h20 only.