It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Project-Sign
reply to post by Donegal_TDI
Cheap Nuclear energy? No such thing. Nuclear power plants can cost 10's of Billions and are very energy intensive to construct. It's also not a renewable energy source. Uranium, which has to be found and extracted from the earth at high cost and burning more energy, is also a finite substance. Then there's enrichment, a very energy intensive process. Then there's the problem of Nuclear waste. Billions more for waste facilities. And of course there's the dangers of Nuclear power. Sellafield and Chernobyl have proven that accidents can and do happen.
edit on 19-11-2010 by Project-Sign because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by summerbreeze.ddp
reply to post by MegaMind
I have seen this video before, but thanks for the refresher. The kicker is that if we have a factor of increase that is sustained then the growth is problematic. We do not. The increase might be 2% one year, 4 % the next year and then 1% the next year. If this consistent constant growth was the case we would have maxed out space for people to live on a long time ago. Our rate of growth and consumption are not constant. Populations are decreased by natural disasters, war, disease, famine. stupidity...and when the populations decrease demand decrease, as populations change the demand for what they need changes. The math is clear but there are so many factors involved.