How can the US be labeled a polluter if we don't make anything anymore?

[Lancer]

Sava, I've been pro environment all along. It's you baby killers and anti military wimps that keep me firmly on the right.

Spiffor, Defiant, people should not be free to harm other people by their actions. Consider the anti smoking laws... I'm all for em. I should be free of some idiot poluting the air I breath. Also, the people living in those South Pacific islands that are going under water would still have a home if it weren't for polluters. Are those people free? I'm for personal responsability. We need to clean up our act and quit whining about it.

Defiant, I don't expect you to willingly give up your 4x4. I just expect you to give it up.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Lancer
Sava, I've been pro environment all along. It's you baby killers and anti military wimps that keep me firmly on the right.

anti-military? dude I'm for nuking Mecca and Medina... I want to kill our enemies... the ones that REALLY threaten us. I won't support sideshows like in Iraq.

Spiffor, Defiant, people should not be free to harm other people by their actions. Consider the anti smoking laws... I'm all for em. I should be free of some idiot poluting the air I breath. Also, the people living in those South Pacific islands that are going under water would still have a home if it weren't for polluters. Are those people free? I'm for personal responsability. We need to clean up our act and quit whining about it.

I'm also for public smoking bans... but not the fascist ones that the government is imposing on PRIVATE businesses.

Defiant, I don't expect you to willingly give up your 4x4. I just expect you to give it up.

he doesn't have to give it up... government policy would encourage (or force) companies to design better trucks and SUV's that are more fuel efficient (perhaps hybrids), or possible run from alternative fuels (I want my hydrogen cars dammit).

[Spiffor]

Lancer t you in this thread.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Dissident
You think I want to drive my gas guzzlign Dodge Ram? Not with gas prices at $2 a gallon.

And now imagine 6$ a gallon, the equivalent of Britain's prices.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
The problem with nuclear reactors is the waste. That stuff is going to be hot for a very long time.

I have a question about that, actually - I read in an article in Chemistry over the summer that the fuel rods are "depleted" when they are down to something like 90% (or was it 97%). Wouldn't it be possible to, instead of using rods, dissolve it into the water in the reactor, and periodically purify it? It would seem that would reduce waste a lot and make the fuel last a lot longer.

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by Dissident
edit: I was wrong. That has never happened before

I did not think the halflife was that long. But it is (700 billion years for U-235- the element used primarily (over 99% pure I believe) in navy nuclear reactors). Why then are they only designing the nuke waste dump in Nevada to only last 10,000 years?

perhaps we should not be using nuclear power- or at least fission. Excpet for military purposes.

There has to be a better way.

I believe U-235 half life is alot shorter than U-238 half live. U-238 form one isope of lead which only form from U-238 which they use to detime how old the earth by the ratio of the lead found with U-238.

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by skywalker


I have a question about that, actually - I read in an article in Chemistry over the summer that the fuel rods are "depleted" when they are down to something like 90% (or was it 97%). Wouldn't it be possible to, instead of using rods, dissolve it into the water in the reactor, and periodically purify it? It would seem that would reduce waste a lot and make the fuel last a lot longer.

What they mean is the rod have too many impureity than need to be reprodust at than plant which extact the impure out of it like weapon grade Pu-239.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Dissident
You think I want to drive my gas guzzlign Dodge Ram? Not with gas prices at $2 a gallon.

Yup. As Adam Smith (the Poly poster) suggested, charge petrol at a price that reflects actual costs, and you'll get a lot of people switch to something much more effecient.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by CharlesBHoff
I believe U-235 half life is alot shorter than U-238 half live. U-238 form one isope of lead which only form from U-238 which they use to detime how old the earth by the ratio of the lead found with U-238.

Google is your friend

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by CharlesBHoff


What they mean is the rod have too many impureity than need to be reprodust at than plant which extact the impure out of it like weapon grade Pu-239.

I know what they mean - the density of nuclear fuel to waste products is too low for a self-sustaining reaction - I was wondering about a possible solution.

[JohnT]

UR: $4.00 of taxes on a gallon of gasoline is not actual cost. It's $4.00 of taxes added on to actual cost.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by skywalker
I have a question about that, actually - I read in an article in Chemistry over the summer that the fuel rods are "depleted" when they are down to something like 90% (or was it 97%). Wouldn't it be possible to, instead of using rods, dissolve it into the water in the reactor, and periodically purify it? It would seem that would reduce waste a lot and make the fuel last a lot longer.

IIRC, U238 is also called "depleted uranium." So what that means is after a while, the fuel rod runs out of U235, thus unable to sustain nuclear reactions. So as Charles pointed out, you need to reprocess the fuel rods at this point.

Just like most metal, uranium does not dissolve very well in water.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by JohnT
UR: $4.00 of taxes on a gallon of gasoline is not actual cost. It's $4.00 of taxes added on to actual cost.

Actual cost means the total cost, including $$$ to clean up the pollution.

[Kuciwalker]

Huh, I thought it did. I figured that the weight difference between the two would make it simple to sift out the U235.

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by skywalker
Huh, I thought it did. I figured that the weight difference between the two would make it simple to sift out the U235.

The weight different isnot really that big to allow easy seperation of the two. The chemical prop of the Isop are the same as the some of the phyical prop are also. It than long involute worked to seperate then. Pu is very flameable and can inite itself on fire very easy. Pu is than very toxic metal which it you cut your finger on it they need to right way cut your entire arm off to save your life. Pu give off gamma radiation also.

[curtsibling]

Originally posted by Lancer
Must be industry out there somewhere... Or is it consumption? Should we stop heating our houses? Don't europeans heat their houses? Drive cars?

Why is the US picked on?

Wow, totally reckless and witless troll thread!

The US still makes thousands of automobiles, ships, powerplants and a myriad of manufactured goods.

To pretend otherwise shows a complete removal from sensible thought.

PS
And the US is not picked on;
That line of thought is myth perpetuated by jingoists seeking to hear the US complimented.

Like a small kid who whines he is not loved, so he can hear his mum say that he is valued.

Pitiable, really.

[Az]

The air pollution of most cars is photochemical smog, these days, as people are getting less and less sulfur in their cars. Particle pollution is also a problem, but can be fixed with filters. The big problem is the Greenhouse effect created by the CO2. Some details: Gas cars WON'T solve the problem. while pollution will be close to zero, with no Sulfur in gas, and NOx levels to be fixed through more fine-tuning of the fuel-air mixture, the greenhouse effect will stay, through the immense inneficiency of internal combustion engines. In such conditions, fuel-cell engines, refueled through plugging into electricity at night, for example, even such that is produced through fossil fuels, will cause a dramatic decrease in CO2 output levels, since the CO2 output by cars will practically disappear from the equation. That happens since by refueling through the night, you're actually using an unused capacity of the fossil fuel power plants, that run "on neutral" through the night, as demand plummets. In this way, we'd be actually saving a lot of energy completely wasted otherwise.

This is, however, only an intermediate solution. The true solutions lie in Fuel cell cars powered by electricity for fusion.

Some would point out that I forgot about the renewable sources. well, I support using renewable sources whenever possible, like Hydropower or tidal power where possible. I do not believe in subsidizing green electricity, however. Cheap energy is possible, when we'll break the fusion problem. Investment in other green technology, unless it's really about to produce a sizeable chunk of our electricity, is futile.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by CharlesBHoff
Pu is than very toxic metal which it you cut your finger on it they need to right way cut your entire arm off to save your life. Pu give off gamma radiation also.

Pu is nasty, nasty stuff.

That's why I was laughing my heads off when the supposedly expert in that Bond film handled weapons grade Pu without any protective clothing. Too bad they didn't die like they would have in reality.

[Docfeelgood]

While back Houston had the worst air in the good ole USA.

Lotta petrol chemical plants here along the bay.
The Gov wanted to blame everything from lawnmowers to barbaque grills for all the polution except the chemical plants.


yep, there is still industry and pollutin.

[alva]

Cheap energy is possible, when we'll break the fusion problem. Investment in other green technology, unless it's really about to produce a sizeable chunk of our electricity, is futile.

Perhaps, on the other hand it does make people aware of these problems/solutions.

(I want my hydrogen cars dammit).

:doitnow:

For reasons other then enviromental too.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yup. As Adam Smith (the Poly poster) suggested, charge petrol at a price that reflects actual costs, and you'll get a lot of people switch to something much more effecient.

It would also totally mess up our economy, seeing as a high speed mass transit system that connects Nebraska and Kansas, etc, to the rest of the country is practically unfeasible.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
It would also totally mess up our economy, seeing as a high speed mass transit system that connects Nebraska and Kansas, etc, to the rest of the country is practically unfeasible.

Maybe because very few people live there? If so few people are really affected, how can your whole economy suffer so much?

[Thorn]

Because there is lots of pollution in the United States. I don't blame you for your ignorance on the subject but I would like to help inform you.

http://www.rtknet.org/

This right to know network lists violations of pollution laws for companies in the United States wherever you live. Enter your city state zip code etc... There is also a case list of settlements over such incidents. There are a lot of companies who continue to commit gross violations of pollution laws, in which penalties are not enforced.

I remember a story about a city 50 miles south of where I live, in which they uncovered that a hospital had been dumping medical waste in a lake, including needles, blood products, and other hazardous materials. A 10 year old boy stepped on one of these needles, and got gangreen, the doctors did not succefully treat it and he lost first his leg and then his life. The Hospital swears that it hadn't been dumping such materials, so a group of several hundred volunteers got rubber suits and literally dug out several dump trucks full of crap the hospital had dumped, and they dumped it on the front lawn of the hospital, until eventually the hospital agreed to clean up its mess. I don't remember if a lawsuit was successful by the familty of the child that died. This happened in Rutherfordton, North Carolina, just a few years ago. This kind of stuff is routine, and happens all the time.

A contractor for a local hospital in my city was incorrectly disposing of abestos by burying it in the forest.

I know you don't want to hear any of this, but this stuff is not too hard to find if you only look for it. Try to be more informed, or continue knowing what you want to believe.

[Defiant]

Originally posted by Lancer
Sava, I've been pro environment all along. It's you baby killers and anti military wimps that keep me firmly on the right.

Spiffor, Defiant, people should not be free to harm other people by their actions. Consider the anti smoking laws... I'm all for em. I should be free of some idiot poluting the air I breath. Also, the people living in those South Pacific islands that are going under water would still have a home if it weren't for polluters. Are those people free? I'm for personal responsability. We need to clean up our act and quit whining about it.

Defiant, I don't expect you to willingly give up your 4x4. I just expect you to give it up.

Lancer,
I don't want people hurt either, however, where does it stop, McDonalds kills people, cars kill people, drinking kills people, NASCAR kills people, guns kill people, heating homes with oil kills people, basic industry kills people........................ so tell me where does it stop. I will tell you where, guys like Sava and Spiffor want us riding our bicycles, wearing black pajamas with funny little hats singing kum by ya my love, with our freedom being dictated to by MR. Hillary Clinton. That may be the Euro/communist way but I guarantee most Americans will not stand for it, so pound away, all you will be doing is pounding sand.
BTW, in China they have a shortage of heating fuel oil, so people are heating their homes with human/animal crap, they are calling the goldish/brown haze from it, a toxic killer cloud(no pun intended). I think you really need to focus on reality and not utopia. This isn't a perfect world yet and at some point our engineers will be able to make my Dodge 4x4 without any pollution to the air or water but until then I am not about to ride around in a Yugo just to make you guys happy.

[Hurricane]

Defiant; You just crack me up. You don't have any sense of reality, do you?

[Defiant]

I think a lot more than most of you, especially of those who really think they know the USA.

[Cruddy]

Hmm... better home insulation, more efficient heaters, smaller homes are why Europe uses less power than US.

Leaving the car out of it for a while.

More use of wind and wave power!

[Defiant]

Cruddy,
I think you use less power because there are less of you. I don't know about better insulation and heating, we are pretty advanced here too, we don't want to p!ss away money if we don't have to. What is your average climate, here where I live, in the last 45 days we have not been above 32, we might have to use a little bit more energy to heat the house.
Smaller homes, I don't know the average sq. ft. or sq. mt between our two nations. I know we have some enormous house(not mine), but some people also live in really small 1 beadroom houses.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Defiant
guys like Sava and Spiffor want us riding our bicycles, wearing black pajamas with funny little hats singing kum by ya my love

No, I want you to drive a car (you know, that thing you drive to go from point A to point B with very little effort) that doesn't guzzle gas like crazy.

It is very rarely useful to drive an SUV instead of a car, and I fail to see why people would need an SUV in their daily commute.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Defiant
I think you use less power because there are less of you.

Last time I checked, the US had less than 400 million inhabs. Which is moot anyway as the pollution per capita is much higher in the US than in Europe.