Help with a nuclear debate?

[NoXion]

I'm debating this anti-nuclear power person (Read: loonie) on another forum and I was wondering if anyone has any good resources/links and some useful tips. I suspect my own arguments aren't up to scratch, and as arrogant as it sounds I damn well know the other guy is wrong.

+++http://www.rebelforums.org/forum/index. ... 1001&st=60

He's also accused this site of being right wing, despite me personally being a left winger (no... left a bit more) and not seeing much political content beyond criticism of Greenpeace, which I do anyway. I think he's wrong but I'm not sure how to articulate it.

If this breaks any rules I would not feel offended if this was locked or flushed, but help is appreciated. I've perused past threads but there is a lack of anything substantial.

[sketerpot]

John McCarthy's site on nuclear power is a good resource.

[Darth Wong]

Anti-nuclear power advocates tend to exaggerate its dangers and forget that its principal competition remains fossil fuel power generation, since all of the wanktastic alternative-fuels schemes have drawbacks of their own.

[NoXion]

John McCarthy's site on nuclear power is a good resource.

Thanks. That site looks like a goldmine of information despite it's plain appearance also the .edu domain should silence any criticism of industry bias, since this guy is convinced the nuclear power industry wants to irradiate everyone in the pursuit of profit.

Anti-nuclear power advocates tend to exaggerate its dangers and forget that its principal competition remains fossil fuel power generation, since all of the wanktastic alternative-fuels schemes have drawbacks of their own.

I actually consider myself fairly well-versed on the drawbacks of alternative energy sources, for a layman anyway. I found a thread which outlines the environmental impact of solar cell etching which should also come in handy, although we haven't fully reached the matter of alternatives, yet.

[ClaysGhost]

I'm debating this anti-nuclear power person (Read: loonie) on another forum [...]

I read some of the posts. Surely...surely that place is some sort of satire. I thought you did well not to get called a capitalist running dog lackey.

[Teleros]

If you've got the time, I heartily recommend "The Skeptical Environmentalist" - very good at critically analysing a lot of this sort of thing, although it is a pretty hefty book.

[NoXion]

I'm debating this anti-nuclear power person (Read: loonie) on another forum [...]

I read some of the posts. Surely...surely that place is some sort of satire. I thought you did well not to get called a capitalist running dog lackey.

The entire forum is a joke, it was started by some guy who got banned off another left wing forum I frequent, as an "alternative" to the "dictatorial" administration of RevLeft and it's "commie club".
Basically a bunch of lifestylist anarchists and related nutballs that will probably never progress beyond bitching about RevLeft and leeching off it's success by soaking up those members too immature. I wouldn't be at all surprised if they called me a lackey of capitalism, you can all but hear "class traitor!" ringing off every enraged syllable.

But enough about that place. I dislike it when the truth is ignored or distorted in order to fit someone's agenda, however parallel it may be to my own political views. Especially when leftists of any stripe do it.

What particularly pisses me off is the way those numbnuts on that forum insist on chaining military use of nuclear technology with it's civilian use in spite of the fact that halting civilian use of nuclear tech will not get rid of it's military aspect.

If you've got the time, I heartily recommend "The Skeptical Environmentalist" - very good at critically analysing a lot of this sort of thing, although it is a pretty hefty book.

I'll keep a look out.

[His Divine Shadow]

www.uic.com.au is another good resource.

Safety for example:
http://www.uic.com.au/nip14.htm

[ClaysGhost]

The entire forum is a joke, it was started by some guy who got banned off another left wing forum I frequent, as an "alternative" to the "dictatorial" administration of RevLeft and it's "commie club".

I scent a suggestion of superstitious, primitive beliefs concerning an afterlife in that forum name! They've betrayed Marx and Lenin!

I wouldn't be at all surprised if they called me a lackey of capitalism, you can all but hear "class traitor!" ringing off every enraged syllable.

Don't be downcast. A copy of Chairman Mao's little red book, some spare time, and a certain mood of boredom are all you need to create endless havoc in such places. They really are paper tigers.

What particularly pisses me off is the way those numbnuts on that forum insist on chaining military use of nuclear technology with it's civilian use in spite of the fact that halting civilian use of nuclear tech will not get rid of it's military aspect.

I heard recently that the six basic machines have all found military applications. Shocking that the inclined plane and the pulley could be used by the forces of counter-revolution to oppress the proletariat, but there you go; they are cunning and devious!

[NoXion]

I heard recently that the six basic machines have all found military applications. Shocking that the inclined plane and the pulley could be used by the forces of counter-revolution to oppress the proletariat, but there you go; they are cunning and devious!

Hahah yes, I've just pointed out to them that eliminating civilian use of nuclear power because the military uses nuclear tech is like banning civilian petrochemical technology because the military has access to napalm.

Also I'm pretty damn sure that most modern militaries do not need the presence of a civilian nuclear industry in order to produce nuclear weapons.

[ClaysGhost]

Hahah yes, I've just pointed out to them that eliminating civilian use of nuclear power because the military uses nuclear tech is like banning civilian petrochemical technology because the military has access to napalm.

I went back to that place to see, and I wish I hadn't because it annoyed me all over again. You can get a higher reading off a geiger counter from natural background in bloody Cornwall than you do around a modern nuclear power station. These nutters are the sort of people that get research reactors closed over less tritium that you'd find in a green "exit" sign.

But I did like the quip about the "death industry". Five seconds of digging turns up some wind turbine manufacturers, including GE Power. But wait! Aren't GE famous? Why yes, I believe they're a huge multi-divisional engineering company that's been around for a while. And what do huge multi-divisional engineering companies almost always get involved in? Why, the death industry. Ask him if he's happy getting wind turbines off the same "corporate" who made engines for these (list includes the Tomcat, the B-2 stealth bomber, the Saab Gripen and the Apache). When were nuclear weapons last used to kill civilians? Erm, last century. When were some of those recipients of G.E. engines used to kill people? Probably last week. So by his own crazed rules he is defeated.

[Braedley]

I'd suggest presenting as much information as possible on CANDU (google) reactors as possible, since you've already mentioned pebble bed reactors.

Interesting fact: If the systems of a CANDU sense that the reaction needs to be stopped, it will be stopped before the lightbulb that indicates when the reaction poison has been released, lights up. At least that's what a friend who did coop at Point Lepreau says.