Cow FArts are gonn destory The WROLD!11!1!!! | A Burger King Commercial

Poll

Is this world fucked?

F
7 (35%)
No
13 (65%)

Total Members Voted: 20

Author Topic: Cow FArts are gonn destory The WROLD!11!1!!! | A Burger King Commercial  (Read 3167 times)

frequency's avatar has roblox shading. this means the picture was taken in roblox. he is a traitor

this is the most underwhelming master matthew thread i've seen in 2020

the tragic irony of being a cow with lactose intolerance...

the tragic irony of being a cow with lactose intolerance...
my new furry oc

frequency's avatar has roblox shading. this means the picture was taken in roblox. he is a traitor

Lego digital designer

If people who were advocating for less emissions and stuff were serious about it, they would be pushing for nuclear power.

If people who were advocating for less emissions and stuff were serious about it, they would be pushing for nuclear power.
instead of pumping greenhouse gasses into the air, we can just dump barrels radioactive waste which takes a very long time to decay into landfills. great idea

If people who were advocating for less emissions and stuff were serious about it, they would be pushing for nuclear power.
MY THERMAL POLLUTION NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

instead of pumping greenhouse gasses into the air, we can just dump barrels radioactive waste which takes a very long time to decay into landfills. great idea
theres disposal sites that are designed to safely dispose of nuclear waste. just cause it’s non renewable and the waste is toxic doesnt mean the cost-benefit isnt massively in favor of using it as a power source.



its not completely safe, sure, but its also not terribly unsafe which some people make it out to be.

the issue is these have to be dealt with eventually. if we don't have any issues, future generations will as nuclear power becomes more common, with expensive and labor intensive upkeep of these sites. any potential leak will be there for a long time, as well
i guess its okay to charge into nuclear power because it only benefits humanity in the short term though
« Last Edit: July 20, 2020, 01:51:40 PM by Unova2 »

If people who were advocating for less emissions and stuff were serious about it, they would be pushing for nuclear power.
the 100 nuclear plants in the US produce ~2k tons waste yearly, of which most is high-level waste that cannot be compactly stored in one place. it's been a bureaucratic and environmental nightmare for the past 20 years finding sites to store such waste, as as soon as one is designated and EPA-congressional committee-state approved it's filled and the issue continues. we're currently constructing two more plants projected to be fully staffed and operational by early 2021 only swelling the problem, while the EPA has been slowly deconstructed over the last four years enabling unsafe and ineffective storage of waste to take place through the lack of a cohesive relationship with the private sector managing the plants.
the cherry on top of these ever growing issues is that offshore windmills are cheaper to make and produce more energy than nuclear, the only fault of it being that it's not as concentrated as energy plants are. oftentimes you'll hear people talking about how you can't power the midwest and plains with offshore windmills because there is no shore and that nuclear is the only clean and effective way to do this, but these areas happen to be the parts of the US that have access to geothermal energy. supplemented with solar and wind farms, this could cleanly and effectively power the entire central US with only minimal localized warming and very little toxic emissions or waste

nuclear power plants only produce large amounts of waste because the currently used method is ultracheap and uses the worst nuclear fuel possible, if we put more money into nuclear waste would be much less of an issue

throwing more money at a problem always fixes it, after all. wouldn't want to get dollar store uranium and thorium isotopes that end in concentrated nuclear waste

research, even government funded, into efficient fission and effective fusion is excellent. however, what we have now is not only unsustainable but converting the current plants to newer methods would cost far more and be far too soon to be worth making it happen now. dropping more money into it isn't a solution because there's no possible way we could do that every eight years without it being a massive waste of its own

Realistically nuclear power plants have two major issues holding it back

Safety
Disposal

A meltdown of a nuclear powerplant is catastrophic. They're rare and unlikely. But they still happen they are near irreversible.  There have been leaps in the safety of nuclear power plants, but public perception as well as guaranteed safety are very low. This needs to be addressed. Its safe, but it's like the danger of an airplane crash. Rare, but it's a guaranteed death.

Disposal might actually be closer to being fixed than ever. If Elon Musk's self landing rockets can cut down space mission expenses, then dumping nuclear waste on the moon or into the sun or something might be a viable option.

Otherwise nuclear power has an insane amount of power efficiency. But it's dangerous and leaves radioactive waste.

Fixing these issues is vital to a Nuclear Powered future.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2020, 02:53:22 PM by Master Matthew² »