Free Documentaries Online

• Nuclear Nightmares

  

  
  

9 Responses to “Nuclear Nightmares”

1. Anar says:

   November 3, 2009 at 10:50 am

   Very informatic program, thanx

   Reply
   • Jason says:

     December 3, 2010 at 8:22 pm

     Informatic is not a word…Hope this has been informative

     Reply
2. Felix says:

   November 5, 2009 at 2:52 am

   But what do our neighbours say?
   THE KIDS HAVE FOUND THE MATCHES!!!!
   Leave the nukes alone,…there are safer means of generating or rather "HARNESSING" energy and our owners have these technologies. They won't release them until EVERY FUCKING DROP OF OIL AND COAL IS SUCKED FROM OUR MOTHER EARTH!!!

   Reply
3. Haricots says:

   November 8, 2009 at 3:56 am

   "Felix" as in Felix the cat? Or what's up with "our owners"?

   Energy politics is too important to let irrational fears and irrationality in general dictate policies.
   Nuclear energy is a good source for energy, it delivers a constant supply of energy not dictated by the weather and climate unlike solar, wind or hydropower. (dam based hydropower is not realy sensitive to shorter fluctuations, so it does not apply as much to that)

   It isn't feasible to base a whole grid on just alternative energy like solar and wind, a lot of people seem to forget that we need to produce the energy when it is needed. We do not have huge batteries that can jump in and deliver the energy when the source is not delivering as needed.
   The usual solution is to have coal plants ready to run when needed, which is far from green.

   I'm not saying that the alternative energy sources has no place, but they cannot supply all of our needs. Nuclear power is a good foundation delivering reliable and green energy.

   Reply
4. THEY says:

   November 8, 2009 at 6:57 pm

   Dear Mr. Felix,

   we would like to inform you that we are watching you.

   We look forward to a successful working relationship in the future.

   Yours sincerely, THEY

   Reply
5. yarr says:

   November 9, 2009 at 12:17 am

   I was =ly surprised in most all information from this, previous to this i considered myself a supporter of Nuclear power, while understandably politics and policy slows progression…njoyed the non-biased no bs approach

   Reply
6. simon says:

   November 25, 2009 at 2:44 am

   Haricots: Nuclear energy is more expensive per unit than wind and solar.
   The only thinhg standing in their way is politics and populaism drtiven by the propaganda of big right wing energy giants. Good, honest folk like those who ran Enron are the people who're telling you nuclear, coal & oil are still the most efficient, and they manage to convince people using the usual methods: burying the real science, and highlighting their bought and paid for 'studies'.
   Real science completed by sientists – not PR & political folk – is already well beyond proving nuclear is not the most efficient means of prodicing electricity for the future compared to those two combined. The old reactorts the U.S has now are still massively suibsidized by the government.

   Reply
7. Jack Kebek says:

   December 15, 2009 at 5:54 pm

   Radioactive residues that will remain radioactive for millions of years? There is no way we can, or should allow anyone, to take that risk, no matter how small, to the future of the Earth, the ONLY Earth.

   Just imagine if we'd have inherited from a contaminated planet… although, it's already quite contaminated :(
   If no alternatives, we must reduce consumption, no matter what.

   Eeek! I have a few light I need to go turn off now!

   Reply
8. Robbyou says:

   April 20, 2010 at 9:43 am

   1 soda can full of Nuclear waste per human lifetime. That is the amount of waste per person over their lifetime that would be produced to create all of the energy (including transportaion) they would need. All of the Nuclear waste produced globally so far in HISTORY could be stored in area about the size of an olympic swimming pool. Perspective should be remembered when considering this idea.

   Reply