| Home | RSS Feeds |
| Funny Pictures | Funny Videos |
| Funny GIFs | YouTube Videos |
| Text/Links | Comic Editor |
| User Rankings | Channels |
| Copyright Removal Request | |
| |
-
stupid sun - Not weird at all
- Neil Patrick Harris
- So here's an idea...
- Oh no this is not g-
- This kid is deep
- Rainbow road of bro-
- Rage
- Unique drinking game
- Har har
- The advantage of in-
- Airline Rules
- (girls screaming)
- Nintendo or Xbox
- poor thing
- Rape
- He's got a strong a-
- The Truth
- Let nothing stop you
- CoD: Ghosts confirm-
#3043 to #3010
-
repostsrepost (07/04/2012) [-]
Solar and Wind don't work, it takes more resources to produce less power. Natural Gas has the potential to replace Oil. Its safe, clean, and america has a shit ton of it. For large scale energy production nuclear energy is the way to go. It releases 0 pollutants into the atmosphere, is the most efficient power source current science can generate, and its safe. You can talk all you want about Exon Valdez, BP oil spill, and Chernobyl, but 1. these incidents are very rare. 2. If we should shut down energy production because 1 incident happens, might as well go back to the Bronze Age.
#3096 to #3043
-
AmusableBman (07/05/2012) [-] The problem with nuclear is that it doesn't like to fluctuate much. Nuclear puts out a constant stream of power, and that power has to be consumed, or you get meltdowns. Nuclear production should be kept at or slightly below the minimum power consumption of a country to prevent big fuckups
#3084 to #3043
-
szymonf (07/05/2012) [-] these incidents might be "rare" (there are regular oil spills) but when they do happen it is on a catastrophic scale affecting vast amounts of land, water and people. And nuclear energy may release 0 pollutants into the atmosphere but we have no solution for getting rid of the nuclear waste. there are reasons as to why cancer levels explode in areas surrounding nuclear sites
#3251 to #3084
-
N. Korean citizen (07/06/2012) [-]
Nuclear power would become much better if we were able to accomplish nuclear fusion in our reactors.
Nuclear fusion leaves less waste (which also has a much shorter half-life than fission waste), has pretty much no risk of meltdown, and can be run from plentiful resources that can far outlast anything we have today.
Unfortunately, the research has been full of difficulties and an economically viable fusion reactor may not be possible any time soon. Still, gotta hope for the best.
Nuclear fusion leaves less waste (which also has a much shorter half-life than fission waste), has pretty much no risk of meltdown, and can be run from plentiful resources that can far outlast anything we have today.
Unfortunately, the research has been full of difficulties and an economically viable fusion reactor may not be possible any time soon. Still, gotta hope for the best.
#3022 to #3010
-
N. Korean citizen (07/03/2012) [-]
But the "green" energy sources we're being presented with are more expensive and less efficient. You're paying more to get less energy. When the price of energy goes up, so does the price of everything else. It would destroy an already-weakened economy.
Besides, our technology to use "dirty" energy sources is improving over time, allowing us to get more out of them with less pollution.
And guess what happens every time we choose not to drill for oil somewhere? Some other country moves in and drills there and we end up buying the oil from them. So in our "crusade" for going green, we don't make a difference in the environment and just end up with more foreign oil dependence.
Besides, our technology to use "dirty" energy sources is improving over time, allowing us to get more out of them with less pollution.
And guess what happens every time we choose not to drill for oil somewhere? Some other country moves in and drills there and we end up buying the oil from them. So in our "crusade" for going green, we don't make a difference in the environment and just end up with more foreign oil dependence.
#3024 to #3022
-
szymonf (07/03/2012) [-] the reason why green energy is less efficient and more expensive is due to the fact that for the past 40 years big oil has been slowing down the development of green industry.
Lastly, when the Saudi Oil minister says that there is no future for oil and that the government is looking towards creating a massive renewable energy sector, then you know that the time has come to ditch oil.
Lastly, when the Saudi Oil minister says that there is no future for oil and that the government is looking towards creating a massive renewable energy sector, then you know that the time has come to ditch oil.
#3011 to #3010
-
reaganomix (07/03/2012) [-] As the price of oil increases it would become more profitable to go to these places in search of raw materials.
Much like when telephone polls were being erected across the country. The wire used copper and it was uncertain whether there was enough copper to cover the country. As the price of copper increased, more people searched for copper because of how much it was worth, it became more cost efficient to mine in areas that were once too expensive to mine into, and we innovated with the invention of fiber optic cables.
Much like when telephone polls were being erected across the country. The wire used copper and it was uncertain whether there was enough copper to cover the country. As the price of copper increased, more people searched for copper because of how much it was worth, it became more cost efficient to mine in areas that were once too expensive to mine into, and we innovated with the invention of fiber optic cables.
