It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Study says Iran's Nuclear needs are genuine.

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
What about wind and hydroelectric power development, for example? Why don't they pursue more of those types of developments?


if you read my replies above you will see i jave amswerd that

politics.abovetopsecret.com...

reply is 13th down




posted on Jan, 9 2007 @ 09:17 AM
link   
i think nuclear programs are more used for research programs that require high volts and sht the general public could do with out it an d use alternate

hey who cares the rate they keep fking with palestine they probably want them to build it make suicide bombers eyes turn green

doest bother me 40% of uranium comes from australiaif the russians want to get rid of a little doest bother me china seems to like are supply

they purchase quite a bit of us if they inrich it and cook a little ploutonium acidently put it on a train to north korea
buy the time they figure out what to do with it the arab world will hope full be a succsess and the us more so banks and it allies will have figured out how to track the # and stop it with space base technology wich seems to be accelarating with all its oil profits



posted on Jan, 10 2007 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by bodrul
Oil wont last for ever and the less Iran uses the more it will have for export and so forth


This is not really a point given less than 15% of Iran’s power production facilities are oil fired; nearly 75% are NG clean fired and Iran has over a 400+ year exploitable supply at current production levels (est.2003 reserves btw. 25-35 trillion m^3). of NG. Not to mention, more NG and combined Hydro plants are due on line as well.

The bottom line is Iran already does not need oil for electrical production, period.

For Iran to actually realize future increases in oil exports (for which the government relies very heavy upon for fiscal revenues) she needs to actively pursue consumer conservation, removal of corruption, reinvestment (repair) in and of the oil production facilities, actually create attractive investment packages for private oil field development, greatly increased investiture in travel infrastructure, wean the populace away from subsidized gasoline and construct refineries to meet their domestic fuel needs (to name a few items)….none-the-less, nuclear energy does not play a part in any of this other than it strips billions of dollars from all of the above and more.

For goodness sake…
3600 people died in Teheran in one month
mainly because of carbon dioxide vehicle emissions from inefficient vehicles and severe traffic jams and non-existent travel infrastructure plague her large cities just as one type of conservation example.

What is interesting is this discussion concerning the vanishing Iranian oil export ability is that it negates her supposed alliances built upon future oil exports/needs and removes the “oil as a weapon” of power argument.



mg



posted on Jan, 10 2007 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by missed_gear
The bottom line is Iran already does not need oil for electrical production, period.


No one does.



For goodness sake…
3600 people died in Teheran in one month
mainly because of carbon dioxide vehicle emissions


That link had absolutely nothing to do with carbon dioxide. And those deaths had absolutely nothing to do with carbon dioxide. Research your links.



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 03:14 PM
link   
www.opec.org...

missed_gear its all to do with Oil

even if Iran has new reservers popping up it still has demand to keep up with. China with its booming econemy and with the middle class growing their fuel needs increase and same with India.

the less they use more they have (even if it is 15%) over the years that is alot.


also as i mentioned before Hydro plants and so forth take space (lots of it) and produce less power then that of nuclear powerplant.

so in the long run nuclear power is more viable to Iran then going Hydro plants and so on period


also the figures from the BBC all those deaths are caused by pollution but only due to the fact that most cars and so forth dont even come close to international stannderds when it comes to emmisions.

(what does that have to do with things?)

[edit on 11-1-2007 by bodrul]



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by bodrul
(what does that have to do with things?)


Everything, especially if you read the post…..

….Iran wastes far, far more imported refined products because of ridiculously low (bottom of the barrel) efficiency.

Furthermore, the less than 15% oil fired plants are being replaced (see previous post) with clean NG fired plants and dual hydroelectric which are more than enough to meet the current and future needs of Iran...ergo, Iran does not need oil to produce electricity...

If Iran was truly worried about her oil exports, pursuing nuclear energy would not be the first step in increasing export volume…


mg



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by missed_gear
If Iran was truly worried about her oil exports, pursuing nuclear energy would not be the first step in increasing export volume…


why wouldnt it?

i stick with what i have mentioned before and what i keep saying

no point in repeating my self



posted on Jan, 11 2007 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by bodrul
i stick with what i have mentioned before and what i keep saying

no point in repeating my self


Likewise...oil in Iran's electrical production plays very little part and just through replacing oil plants with NG there will be zero oil used in electrical production.

If you want to buy into the idea "Iran needs nuclear energy"...so be it.


mg



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join