Maintained by the ScienceBlogs Overlords, Page 3.14 points you in the direction of some of ScienceBlogs' finest offerings, plus the tastiest tidbits of science news and opinion from around the web.
This weekend, ScienceBloggers discussed the virtues and downfalls of a world run on modern nuclear power. Benjamin Cohen sparked the dialogue on The World's Fair with an interview with author and environmentalist Rebecca Solnit, famous for her opposition to nuclear power. Within just a few hours, Built on Fact's Matt Springer responded, categorically arguing against Solnit's piece and citing events at Chernobyl as an overly hyped specter. "Chernobyl is to modern nuclear power as bloodletting is to penicillin," he says. Ethan Siegel followed in suit on Starts with a Bang, where he offered compromise by pointing out that "any non-renewable energy source is not 'the answer' to our energy problems," but also mentions "how superior in every way nuclear power is" to alternatives such as coal. Will the planet be a cleaner, safer, more sustainable place by creating jobs for more Homer Simpsons, or are we opening the floodgates for a bunch of Blinkies, Springfield Nuclear Power Plant's three-eyed fish?
- Nuclear is not "the answer"; slowing down in a sped-up culture is an act of resistance; and more from Rebecca Solnit on The World's Fair
- Nuclear Power on Built on Facts
- A Labor Day Special: Laboring for the Earth and Big Science on Starts With a Bang
- Nuclear Power on Deltoid
Comments
IS this picture form Simpsons ???
Posted by: Sahil | October 28, 2009 1:11 AM
Although Nuclear Power has risks the chances of a real melt down is less than 1/1000. Nuclear Power has small risks and leaks but the plants are checked for safety. In 1986 the RMBK reactor was unstable and consisted of inferior technology. The carbon graphite tips actually increased the chain reaction of the Plutonium. Nuclear weapons could be converted into nuclear fuel.
Coal Plants are 50% reponsible for Climate change and global warming a extremely serious condition. If we don't act quickly in the next 5 years it could be too late. Small nuclear plants were other forms of power isn't ready could replace coal plants.
Posted by: Daniel | November 28, 2009 2:15 PM
what the fuck
was this picture taken from the simpsons
Posted by: who the fuck cares about my name | December 8, 2009 9:17 PM
Nuclear power is not the answer unless we get smart and some of us start living in space, on the moon, or Mars. On the earth, however, using nuclear power is foolish. It is much too dangerous. Sure, accidents at nuclear-powered plants are relatively rare. But, when they occur, they tend to be devastating and there is no way to make the use of nuclear power perfectly safe. We would be better off using natural gases and finding ways to exploit the deposits of methane hydrate and retrieving methane from sewage and garbage.
Posted by: James Trusty | December 10, 2009 5:40 AM