PDA

View Full Version : How do we make nuclear popular?



Glom
2005-Dec-24, 01:59 PM
Old prejudices die hard. (http://www.world-nuclear.org/nb/nb05/latestnews.htm)

Apparently even the alleged end of the world isn't enough to convince most people that clean, safe, abundant power is good.

What can we do to get the message across?

mopc
2005-Dec-24, 07:56 PM
Information, education... it took decades to demonize nuclear, it´ll take decades to make it likeable again. It has already started to some people, the other day I was at this world city forum and I asked people what they thought about nuclear, most were unprejudiced and were all for it. I was suprised to see how much latent support nuclear already has among lay medium-educated people.

My education on nuclear is to a great extent due to you, Glom, thank you.

galacsi
2005-Dec-24, 08:19 PM
By stopping it !

Moose
2005-Dec-24, 08:25 PM
Mmm. I suspect Galacsi may be on to something. The fastest way to make someone want nuclear technology (or any controvertial commodity) is to say they're not allowed to have it. Think Prohibition.

soylentgreen
2005-Dec-24, 08:29 PM
The problem isn't nuclear power nor the plants themselves...it's the people responsible for the safe operation of it all. Their hideous record of maintenance and security standards should make any intelligent individual quite wary of "the wonders of the atomic age!"

galacsi
2005-Dec-24, 08:38 PM
The problem isn't nuclear power nor the plants themselves...it's the people responsible for the safe operation of it all. Their hideous record of maintenance and security standards should make any intelligent individual quite wary of "the wonders of the atomic age!"

May be you are right , but let me say you something . People are people and you are not going to change them . And for what reason after all. And an other thing : Security is incredibly boring , yes it sucks ! It is an eternal fight to implement security measures. It is incredible the energy lost in the process.

galacsi
2005-Dec-24, 08:50 PM
To be more positive :

In France the vast majority of our electric power come from nuclear power stations. And they work very well , you have to recognise it.

montebianco
2005-Dec-24, 09:21 PM
Old prejudices die hard. (http://www.world-nuclear.org/nb/nb05/latestnews.htm)

Apparently even the alleged end of the world

Maybe I missed something, but didn't catch that in the article...



isn't enough to convince most people that clean, safe, abundant power is good.

Methinks the issue is not that people think clean, safe, and abundant energy is not good, but rather that they think nuclear energy is not clean and safe. Also, depending on where you are, it isn't all that abundant either.


What can we do to get the message across?

Very little. But, if the price of fossil fuels (both in money and environmental damage) increases in the future, that will do wonders to bost alternative sources of energy. If it doesn't, then I'm not sure why you would want to get the message across.

Monique
2005-Dec-25, 01:48 AM
I believe you must make nuclear energy sexy. Americans say sex sell, no?

Gullible Jones
2005-Dec-25, 01:58 AM
Sort of... In America, there is some separation between sex and reality.

At any rate, I think that advanced breeder reactors are the way to go. You'd use less uranium, make much less waste, and generally make nuclear power look like a much more appealing option.

(And for those wary about the fact that breeders use plutonium, please explain how any terrorist could steal plutonium from inside the reactor. Not an easy thing to do!)

Laminal Cockroach
2005-Dec-25, 02:01 AM
I believe you must make nuclear energy sexy. Americans say sex sell, no?

"With our new and imrpoved nuclear plants, which also look very sexy, You will very pleased with your sex life"
HHHHMMmmmmmmm!! Nucleaaaarr....!!!

LurchGS
2005-Dec-25, 02:22 AM
I query the "hideous record of maintenance and security".

have there been documented instances where security at a nuclear plant was completely penetrated?

Aside from the two most talked about nuclear accidents (neither of which had essentially nothing to do with maintenance or security) have there been other "problems" the public doesn't know about?

From what I've seen, the nuclear inudstry has a better safety record than the space industry.

montebianco
2005-Dec-25, 02:23 AM
I believe you must make nuclear energy sexy. Americans say sex sell, no?

Maybe the shape of the cooling towers could be changed...

Ilya
2005-Dec-25, 02:26 AM
The problem isn't nuclear power nor the plants themselves...it's the people responsible for the safe operation of it all. Their hideous record of maintenance and security standards should make any intelligent individual quite wary of "the wonders of the atomic age!"
Are you talking about people as a species, or specifically about people responsible for the safe operation of nuclear power plants? Because if you mean the latter, than your post is a grossly false accusation. In Western world civilian nuclear power industry has a better safety record than ANY other industry you care to name. Even in Communist world the safety record of nuclear power is a lot better than that of other industries -- and yes, that is taking Chernobyl into account.

Ilya
2005-Dec-25, 02:29 AM
Old prejudices die hard. (http://www.world-nuclear.org/nb/nb05/latestnews.htm)

Apparently even the alleged end of the world isn't enough to convince most people that clean, safe, abundant power is good.

Glom:

Quote from the article you linked to: At a time when the nuclear power option is being vigorously pursued in the fast developing countries of Asia

A large part of the human race is convinced already.

LurchGS
2005-Dec-25, 02:31 AM
Glom:

Quote from the article you linked to: At a time when the nuclear power option is being vigorously pursued in the fast developing countries of Asia

A large part of the human race is convinced already.

not that they have a choice...

Glom - I think the only way to be successful at this is a long-term, quiet, understated, advertising campaign... stress the safety record, stress the facts, etc.

Van Rijn
2005-Dec-25, 08:39 AM
Yes, the facts. A lot of the problem is that even generally respected newspapers and most other news media regularly oversimplify the subject or just make incorrect statements. For instance, it is very common to see a statement like "the storage of nuclear waste, which remains radioactive for [pick one: 10,000 years, tens of thousand of years, 250,000 years] has not been solved." Of course, pretty much everything is somewhat radioactive and will be for as long as the planet exists. The question is how radioactive and for how long, but this entire subject is deemed too complex an issue to discuss in a newspaper article. As for storage, there are many effective and extremely low risk solutions, but risk comparisons to other energy options are also deemed too complex to discuss. And they will be sure to include an extremist's nonsensical comments about the horrors of nuclear waste.

In short, the news media is saturated with misinformation on the subject. If you can get them to come around, you'll have won half the battle.

Eroica
2005-Dec-25, 09:16 AM
Money. If it can be shown that nuclear power saves money in the long run, then....

Problem is, there's a widespread perception that nuclear power is very very expensive, and can only survive in the market place with the assistance of massive government subventions....

ZaphodBeeblebrox
2005-Dec-26, 01:38 AM
Money. If it can be shown that nuclear power saves money in the long run, then....

Problem is, there's a widespread perception that nuclear power is very very expensive, and can only survive in the market place with the assistance of massive government subventions....
Ugh, One Time, a Speaker In a Class, I Took, Spent an HOUR, Bragging, About How Much Money, he'd Forced The Nuclear Industry, To Spend, In Increased, Red Tape ...

He Then, At The Close of his Tirade, Turned Around, And Complained, About Just How Much, It Cost, To License New, Nuclear Power Plants ...

I Didn't Actually, Get Thrown Out of The Class, For Calling him, a Hypocritical Fear-Monger, But, That Little, Tiny Reason, Was #3 or 4 On, The Short List!

Ilya
2005-Dec-26, 03:01 AM
I Didn't Actually, Get Thrown Out of The Class, For Calling him, a Hypocritical Fear-Monger, But, That Little, Tiny Reason, Was #3 or 4 On, The Short List!
I don't get it. Did you call him a "Hypocritical Fear-Monger" or not, and what "list" are you talking about?

Dragon Star
2005-Dec-26, 03:23 AM
Maybe the shape of the cooling towers could be changed...

Ok then monte, can you describe the suggested design?:)

But seriously I think that the world should start protesting, now hold on, I know, I know, it's impractical, it would for sure be effective. If you could convince enough people that their efforts would for certain pay off if they protest, then surely it would take off as the news would catch on very quickly and it would be a global effect. The media is the main key here, but the main problem is to get it coordinated to the specific message your trying to convey, as lots of protests quickly get out of hand and turn into riots and then the message looks bad, and if this happened the efforts would be ruined. Other then that I think it is a good idea really.

*waits for someone to pick my idea apart*

Halcyon Dayz
2005-Dec-26, 03:57 AM
I just don't see pro-nukers rioting in the streets. :whistle:

Gemini
2005-Dec-26, 05:44 AM
"With our new and imrpoved nuclear plants, which also look very sexy, You will very pleased with your sex life"
HHHHMMmmmmmmm!! Nucleaaaarr....!!!

Make them look like like the lamp in "A Christmas Story" 8) ;)

montebianco
2005-Dec-26, 08:53 AM
Ok then monte, can you describe the suggested design?:)

I don't want to get banned :D

Nick

HenrikOlsen
2005-Dec-26, 10:26 AM
Ok then monte, can you describe the suggested design?:)
Make them like Coca-Cola bottles and get a sponsorship to help build the plant.

Candy
2005-Dec-26, 12:31 PM
Since Sex Sells. Why not do what the Japanese did with Sapporo Beer (http://www.sapporobeer.jp/english/history/)? I heard long ago the design of their cans (hour glass) was meant as a woman's figure. This would attract men to buy the product. True or not, it sure is a good idea. :razz:

Glom, I saw this thread after you first posted it. I was trying to find a t-shirt generator, so I could make a logo and post the photo. I can't find squat! :mad:

ZaphodBeeblebrox
2005-Dec-26, 02:07 PM
I don't get it. Did you call him a "Hypocritical Fear-Monger" or not, and what "list" are you talking about?
I Couched It, In Nicer Terms, But Yes, I Did, Call him That ...

The "List", Is The Reasons, Why I Stopped, Taking The Class ...

The Real Reason Is, After Compiling a 6 Page, Refutation of Some, Of his Stupider Points, Like That The Power Plants, On Nuclear Submarines Can EXPLODE, Yes they Run Hot, But The Danger, Lies In Going Critical, Not Super-Critical, Lethal Radiation Burst, Instead of Explosion; I Finally Realized, I Just Didn't Care!!!

A Friend of Mine, Was Leaving too, So we Dropped It; I Did, However, Still Manage, To Pass My Submarine Information, On To, My Other Friend, In The Class!!!

teri tait
2005-Dec-26, 06:11 PM
Why not dub it an exclusive club for the power elite, members only with a catchy motto like: If you want extra cool power, you with have to pay us, unless you are us!

See, then you catch 'em either way...
Annoucer overvoice:
"Nuclear Illumination, available to the limited, too!"

soylentgreen
2005-Dec-26, 06:28 PM
Are you talking about people as a species, or specifically about people responsible for the safe operation of nuclear power plants?
People, in general!


Because if you mean the latter, than your post is a grossly false accusation. In Western world civilian nuclear power industry has a better safety record than ANY other industry you care to name.
It takes about 5 seconds to research the amount of mishaps that have occured just in the United States. You must also take in to account, that if and when there is a problem, the potential for disaster is quite ghastly.

On statistics: I play Castle Wolfenstein on-line and when I join a game in the last few seconds of the round I may fire the panzerfaust once and take out a german soldier. The game ends and I have the "highest accuracy" rating....after one shot! Statistics don't treat radiation burns...Statistics won't cure babies with birth-defects...Statistics don't mean anything when just ONE large nuclear accident is "messy".

AND YES, the saftey record of these plants is bad! It appears that, like most people in my country, you need to have a disaster in your front yard to understand the danger. Statistics said living below sea level in a known hurricane area was a bad idea...no one worried in New Orleans last July.

If you're waiting for some cockamamie James Bond scenario to play out at a nuclear facility as your basis for an incident, I shouldn't bother typing any further.

I'd be more than happy to send you some of my back-issues of The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists to bring you up to speed. (Sorry, I only have one of the Doomsday Clock t-shirts from them, so no apparel ;) )

Even in Communist world the safety record of nuclear power is a lot better than that of other industries -- and yes, that is taking Chernobyl into account.
I wonder how the poisoned people of the region feel about that. Somehow I think you would have a hard time selling "safety is job #1" as a nuke facility motto to them.

So, no...No I don't trust you(your brother, your country, my governent, nuke reg commish, Kofi Annan, Jack Lemmon, the pope, etc...) to maintain a nuclear facility properly. I can't. Not in a country where Truman gets in front of the camera as says about the bomb, "We thank God that it has come to us, instead of to our enemies; and we pray that He may guide us to use it in His ways and for His purposes." (What the hell was he thinking? How kosher will it be when some jihadist says the same exact thing about his homemade nuke in a video sent to Al-Jazeera?) People can't even be trusted to keep their damn SUV's in their driving lane here.

It's not fear of nuclear power itself(we probably never leave this planet without it!) , its a proven record of irresponsibility by just about every nation you might care to mention...regardless of hemisphere or political ideology! Sorry. Chalk it up to entropy, devolution, social regression, or a plain old stern reality check...whatever. I just don't trust mankind enough to handle it well.

To tie it to the other approach mentioned in this thread...when you make "trusting the abilities of people left in charge of nuke facility X" sexy again, you might be able to sell the benefits of the atomic age to the public at large. Remember "Atoms for Peace"? That's ok. Most nations involved in the program don't either.

mugaliens
2005-Dec-26, 07:47 PM
From what I've seen, the nuclear inudstry has a better safety record than the space industry.

It has a better safety record than any other source of power!

mugaliens
2005-Dec-26, 07:48 PM
Since Sex Sells. Why not do what the Japanese did with Sapporo Beer (http://www.sapporobeer.jp/english/history/)? I heard long ago the design of their cans (hour glass) was meant as a woman's figure. This would attract men to buy the product. True or not, it sure is a good idea.

I thought they already did that with the cooling towers???

Candy
2005-Dec-26, 08:09 PM
I thought they already did that with the cooling towers???
Okay, I'm visualizing in my head the cooling towers.
Seems to be very bottom heavy.
That's not my idea of a nice figure to lure a man. ;)

LurchGS
2005-Dec-26, 08:17 PM
depends on the man, ne?

Isn't there a song (well, rap ... thing) to that effect?

Dragon Star
2005-Dec-26, 08:26 PM
Ok, just a bit of fact to help along....

..The beauty found is from symmetry and geometry. Believe it or not what you find physically attractive to Susie Q across the street is the shapes that make up her body, and the lengths and withs of those shapes. If you could replicate a similar effect that would be the average for men for those shapes that are attractive, then that might actually be possible.

Candy
2005-Dec-26, 08:27 PM
I read a document many moons ago, that a man sees a woman's figure as pleasing when the waist is 10 inches less than the bust and hips. It didn't matter how small or big the woman was, it was just the measurements. For example, Mae West, Rachel Welch, Marilyn Monroe, Loni Anderson, Pamela Anderson, etc... All the women are very different in size, but all have the 10 inch less (or more) waist compared to bust and hips. :razz:

LurchGS
2005-Dec-26, 08:28 PM
just remember: 1:1.62

Candy
2005-Dec-26, 08:31 PM
36-26-36

Glom
2005-Dec-27, 04:38 AM
Statistics won't cure babies with birth-defect.

And where have they happened... ever (http://www.geocities.com/freedomforfission/app/unscear.html)?


If you're waiting for some cockamamie James Bond scenario to play out at a nuclear facility as your basis for an incident, I shouldn't bother typing any further.

What we're waiting for is for it to be demonstrated that these irresponsibly maintained nuclear reactors with a terrible safety record have actually harmed the American public.

We need more than innuendo (http://www.geocities.com/freedomforfission/app/calendar.html) and FUD (http://www.geocities.com/freedomforfission/deb/fud.html) in support of your distrust of the safest (http://www.geocities.com/freedomforfission/saf/reactor.html) form of large scale power in the world.


I just don't trust mankind enough to handle it well.

Then you must be positively livid about people handling fossil fuels etc because that's where you'll find your large death toll.

mickal555
2005-Dec-27, 08:27 AM
Australia and New Zeeland are really behind R.E nuclear power...

We have only one reactor to make radio-active substances for medical and other uses. It doesn't generate power, and the amount of stuff it actually produces is very small... It doesn't stop people having kittens about it though...

PhantomWolf
2005-Dec-27, 09:29 AM
NZ has a law again Nuclear Power. I'll refrain from commenting further because it'd get me banned.

HenrikOlsen
2005-Dec-27, 10:32 AM
One of the typical arguments by activists about the dangers of nuclear power is to find a waterhole downwind of a nuclear plant and see lots of deformed tadpoles, whus neatly "proving" that the plant is inducing harmful mutations.
They forget to check waterholes upwind and far away where they would see the same deformations.
Many frog species have a very high rate of misformed tadpoles, some up to 90%, but since they produce 10.000 at a time, that's not something that's heavily selected against.

LurchGS
2005-Dec-29, 06:59 AM
interesting...

I keep hearing stories about blue grasshoppers around one nuke plant..

mugaliens
2005-Dec-29, 08:07 AM
I read a document many moons ago, that a man sees a woman's figure as pleasing when the waist is 10 inches less than the bust and hips. It didn't matter how small or big the woman was, it was just the measurements. For example, Mae West, Rachel Welch, Marilyn Monroe, Loni Anderson, Pamela Anderson, etc... All the women are very different in size, but all have the 10 inch less (or more) waist compared to bust and hips. :razz:

I think most cooling towers have tops that are close to the same diameter as their bottoms. They may be a bit wider for stability, but much can be said of the average woman, today, no?

Candy
2005-Dec-29, 08:56 AM
I think most cooling towers have tops that are close to the same diameter as their bottoms. They may be a bit wider for stability, but much can be said of the average woman, today, no?
I find that the majority of women today have no waist, even movie stars. It's like they have the same measurements from top to bottom. Very strange. :eh:

ZaphodBeeblebrox
2005-Dec-29, 05:19 PM
I find that the majority of women today have no waist, even movie stars. It's like they have the same measurements from top to bottom. Very strange. :eh:
Hence, The New Commercials ...

For, Boy-Cut Denim ...

However, I Just Have, to Ask, WHY?

:wall:

LurchGS
2005-Dec-29, 05:25 PM
well, it's not THAT bad, but it's true that the average actress (and, of course the average woman) is not as 'voluptuous' as Marilyn or Ms. Welch.. the shift seems to be away from impressing us drooling men and more toward 'identifying' with the teen/young 20 females of our culture.

Personally, I think that's a horrible move. Not that I'm biased or anything.


------------------
there are two ideal proportions...

1:1.62 and 36:24:34

Candy
2005-Dec-29, 05:36 PM
Hence, The New Commercials ...

For, Boy-Cut Denim ...

However, I Just Have, to Ask, WHY?

:wall:
This has been the trend for over 25 years. I wear skirts and dresses, since I can't find jeans or slacks to fit me correctly. Apparently, women with "girlie" figures are not important or rarely exist. :(

LurchGS
2005-Dec-29, 05:43 PM
tsk - isn't that 'fulll figured'?

I have similar problems... at 6'6" (35" inseam), 44 inch waist (I need to do something about that), and bike-rider's thighs (ha! no fat there!) finding slacks of any nature is a pain. Carhartts is good, though.

Now, if I could just find decent shirts - if they fit my chest/shoulders/height, they're invariably too tight at the cuff and forearm (9.5 inch wrist, 15 inch forearm)... and forget about buttoning the collar - nobody in the world seems to have a 21 inch neck these days

ZaphodBeeblebrox
2005-Dec-29, 05:45 PM
tsk - isn't that 'fulll figured'?

I have similar problems... at 6'6" (35" inseam), 44 inch waist (I need to do something about that), and bike-rider's thighs (ha! no fat there!) finding slacks of any nature is a pain. Carhartts is good, though.

Now, if I could just find decent shirts - if they fit my chest/shoulders/height, they're invariably too tight at the cuff and forearm (9.5 inch wrist, 15 inch forearm)... and forget about buttoning the collar - nobody in the world seems to have a 21 inch neck these days
See ...

That's Why, I'm LUCKY ...

I've Been Between, a 29-33/30, For a Decade!

:dance: