40 replies to this topic

[General]

[url="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5080732.stm"]http://news.bbc.co.u...ope/5080732.stm[/url]

Mother

[Prophet of the Pimps]

kwel.



its not dangerous since military subs use the same tech and they have a pretty safe record.

[AllStarZ]

Well we really don't know about that either. For all we know, a sub could've had a breach and the information about that classified.

[Slightly Wonky Robob]

sorry for being a complete n00b, but nuclear power is a renewable energy source, isn't it?..... So it could potentialy replace fossil fuels, its just the safety issue that keeps it from being in wide use

Edited by Bob, 14 June 2006 - 22:39.

[fjsgdfsdjgbsgkjfg]

dont forget the nukelear waste that it makes

[Prophet of the Pimps]

actually all the nuke fuel in the world would only last us for 40 years if they were to completely replace fossil. so even nukes aren't an option. until we figure out nuclear fusion we are fubared.

[The_Hunter]

prophet of the pimps, on 14 Jun 2006, 23:20, said:

its not dangerous since military subs use the same tech and they have a pretty safe record.<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

then what do you call those subs we dutch had to dig up for the russians a few years ago which sunk with there entire crew

[Prophet of the Pimps]

kursk sunk because of the torpedo bay had an accident. it had nothing to do with the ships reactor.

[The_Hunter]

there was a other sub besides that one who also sunk a little while before the kursk i beleive.

but yea this thing will probably not have torpedo's so that shouldn't be a problem.

[Prophet of the Pimps]

the reason i like this idea is because of its value in disaster zones. they can hook this up to the grind and supply vital power to the disaster zones. i hope some one tries and airborne version of this with either a 747 or an il-72. think of the potential benefits but an airborne version is gonna face very stiff resistance from the eco heads.

[Sic]

There is the movie K-19 , where they show a nuclear submarine in danger during the cold war.

[Moosy Crisp]

prophet of the pimps, on 15 Jun 2006, 04:08, said:

actually all the nuke fuel in the world would only last us for 40 years if they were to completely replace fossil. so even nukes aren't an option. until we figure out nuclear fusion we are fubared.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, I heard France actually recycles the radioactive waste to squeeze out any energy that is left, but the process still make waste that has energy in it so this could be classified as a renewable source. However, to create the machines that do this is a little on the expensive side, but I would say it's worth it.

[chance]

about the kirsk, the kirsk was run into by the US sub, USS norwall. the info was classaifed, until the russians had evidence, than the US admit to our part, the norwall. the subs hit because the kirsk was useing its silent propoltion and could not use active sonar, so the norwall couldnt hear the kirsk and the colided

[AllStarZ]

The Real Reason? Nobody knows. But the bow of the submarine was pretty damaged.

And chance, there exists no ship called the USS Norwal.

Edited by AllStarZ, 15 June 2006 - 20:14.

[Whitey]

The Narwhal?

[chance]

nevermind i got this from wik... the enclclopedia

Quote

The Kursk sailed out to sea to perform an exercise of firing dummy torpedoes at Pyotr Velikiy , a Kirov-class battlecruiser. On August 12, 2000 at 11:28 local time (07:28 UTC), the missiles were fired, but an explosion occurred soon after on the Kursk. The exact reasons of the explosion are currently unknown, versions including torpedo self-detonation, diversion act, and collision with another submarine. The chemical explosion blasted with the force of 100-250 kg of TNT and registered 2.2 on the Richter scale [1]. The submarine sank to a depth of 108 metres, approximately 135km (85 miles) off Severomorsk, at 69°40′N 37°35′E. A second explosion 135 seconds after the initial event measured 4.4 on the Richter scale, equating 3-7 tons of TNT [2] Either this explosion or the earlier one propelled large pieces of debris far back through the submarine, hinting at an explosion of massive proportions.

[smooder]

NUCLEAR STUFF IS STUPID

NOW IS THE TIME TO USE THESE SMILEYS .... :asshole: :dickhead:

Please all watch this video by greenpeae.

http://video.google....783&q=chernobyl

It makes sense.

NO NUKES!!

[Moosy Crisp]

Greenpeace can lick my nutsack. They do jack shit to find us any renewable resources, and they themselves use the energy from nuclear powerplants in their homes. So they can stfu

[smooder]

Actually thy dont, they have their own generators.

Some stuff that greenpeace do is stupid but others isnt

I ho[e you have watched that video before making your mind up.

[Ironwolf]

Thats neat.
But thats why I dont like nuclear power. all the waste and melt-downs.

And prophet, an airborne version wouldnt work. Been tried. The cockpit would have to be lined with enough lead to shield the pilots. By then it'd be way uber heavy and need unrealistic engines to lift it off the ground

Also
I am anti-hippy

[Alias]

I'm for 10 000 hectare windfarms

[Soul]

One word cost how much will building them cost how much will it cost people to use them how much will it cost to maintain them and were will they build them.

[Moosy Crisp]

That movie is fucking propaganda within itself. It will produce more waste and fumes in the air building your wind powered generators than would be worth it, not to mention use up precious space. Solar energy is impractical at the moment, or so I've heard. And we'd be wrecking all of our rivers if we dammed them for the hydroelectric thingies. What is cool though, is that a generator company my dad works for is finding alternative fuel sources to power the engines in the generator, although I'm not too sure how that's gonna work out.

People twist Chernobyl to suit their point, like those fuckers do about Columbine, trying to take my guns away. Ukraine messed up, big time, a lot of people got injured, and we can't change that. Most damages have been payed for, and you can be damned sure they aren't gonna fuck up that bad anytime soon.

[Soul]

The bottem line is Shit Happens we just have to deal with the fact of the Chernobyl Accident and try to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Edited by Forgotten_Soul, 16 July 2006 - 23:47.

[Eureka Seven]

I my self really dont care what happens much to the earth, as long as it stays like it is for at least 60-90 more years, by then hopefully we will be building space stations on Mars and putting civilians out there. And about the windmill power plants, there good for a time but they cost way to much then there worth, but if u get a job at one ur one lucky guy, they get really good pay checks lol. Hydrogen power plants, if we ever make them they will make every other power source obsolete, well maybe not water for water cars or sumtin, but its so freken clean its like using electricity, the only problem is that right now its costs more to make it then what its worth. I think iv herd some were that we can make hydrogen power plants but no body will for that reason it costs too much. although lets say that chernobel (i cant spell it) happens to one of these hydrogen power plants. WELL we would be looking at a big black radioactive crater were a small or midium sized country was. Only if aliens were to come to earth to give us like plasma crystals or sumtin LOL.