Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Why does John McCain imply that Nuke energy is safe just b/c he used to sail around on nuclear reactor ships?

Have you taken a look at the guy? I know he's near 90, but I think the radiation is what causes that permanent crackled smile and the need to call everyone "my friends."

6 Answers

  • paul h
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Navy ships have used them for nearly 60 years with a great safety record....other countries like France have been using them for decades and use the approach of only building 3-4 designs rather than the US model of letting various construction companies come up with their own varied complex designs which leads to many flaws and inconsistencies.

    Molten Salt Reactors are even safer.

    Molten Salt Reactors (MSRs) - a type of Nuclear Reactor

    The most interesting application of molten salt technology was the development of the Molten Salt (Nuclear) Reactor (MSR). Originally developed to power a deep penetration bomber for targets in the Soviet Union during the early Cold War (1946 - 1962)4, it is a remarkable, yet virtually unknown reactor. Part of the problem was the limited geographical experience of the MSR as both operating MSRs were built only at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), near Knoxville, Tennessee, USA.

    The first MSR was the 1954, 100-hour operation of the Aircraft Reactor Experiment (ARE) at ORNL5. Its sole purpose was to demonstate the then unheard of notion of operating a reactor at red heat (~750° C; ~1,550° F) with a molten fuel and coolant consisting of melted fluoride salts (sodium fluoride, NaF; zirconium fluoride, ZrF 4; and UF4 [enriched in 235U])6. The second MSR was a civilian power plant prototype, the Molten Salt Reactor Experiment (MSRE)7. Hugely successful, it was ignored by the US Atomic Energy Commission (US AEC), which had decided to favor the Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor (LMFBR). The Director of ORNL, Dr. Alvin Weinberg, pushed for the MSR, but was fired for his efforts 8.

    The notable features of this reactor are:

    Meltdown proof

    Does not produce weapons grade plutonium

    Has inherent non-proliferation features

    Thousands of years of energy

    Simplified fuel cycle (no fuel elements nor reprocessing required)

    Its wastes are simpler and less toxic than current nuclear wastes

    Only hundreds of years of storage versus thousands for the current wastes

    Can completely destroy military plutonium

    Can burn the existing wastes (spent fuel)!

    Higher thermal efficiencies (operates at a "Red Heat"; ~700° C [1,260° F])

    The reality is that nuclear power can be safe and plentiful while also being a clean form of electrical energy production.

    And recent re-evaluations of oil deposits in North Dakota fields shows that they contain billions of barrels of oil...much more than previously thought.

    The entire US electrical needs could be handled by a solar farm of a hundred miles square. The US can be entirely energy's just a matter of political will and getting the voters riled up enough to force politicians to do something rather than cow-towing to the oil and coal industries for re-election campaign funds...

  • 1 decade ago

    Nuclear Energy is safe, just look at the record. I have lived with nuclear power for over 25 years and I believe it is safe. 8 years on nuclear submarines and 20 years at a commercial nuclear power plant. I would much rather live next door to a nuke plant than a coal plant, chemical plant, paper mill, or any other heavy industry.

    Everyone who doesn't know any better makes remarks like this, but still wants their lights, computers, televisions, refrigerators to come on when they plug them in. All forms of electrical power production have environmental impact and risk. I believe nuclear is the best choice for base-load electrical power.

    ps. I live within 10 miles of the nuclear power plant at which I work as an instrument and control technician, ensuring the safety, monitoring and operating systems are properly maintained and calibrated.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Our fear of nuclear energy comes from silly stupidstitions generated by Hollywood movies like Silkwood and China Syndrome. We spend millions on storing nuclear waste instead reusing it like other countries do. Ever hear of a nuclear accident aboard an aircraft carrier? That's how safe it is. Chernobyl happened not because of a danger of nuclear power, but because builders cut corners and budgets were pinched to save a few million. Boom, melt down.

    If we are serious about cutting "green house gasses" causing "global warming" then nuke power is the way to go. Nuke power produces no CO2 and if done right, very little waste.

    Let's see how good you look at near 90. We should all be so lucky to live that long. Even people who are 50 don't have that kind of energy. Too fat from too much beer.

  • 1 decade ago

    Nuclear-Electric energy is in widespread use around the world. France generates as much as 60% of its electricity this way. There are very few problems related to nuclear energy.

    In the US, one of our main problems is storage of the spent reactor rods. President Carter passed a law prohibiting the reprocessing of these rods to get rid of waste and generate new reactor rods from the purified uranium. This process is standard around the world but we are prohibited from doing it - so we must store those radioactive rods rather than purify and re-use their fissionable material.

    Bear in mind that the Chernobyl reactor was not a power-generating reactor - it was an experimental system without standard safety features. It broke down because two competing teams of Russian scientists were fighting over its use for their own experiments - and they tried to mess with each other - leading to disaster.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    well you are an idiot......the older means he is more experienced other then little boy obama.......well who cares if he calls them "my friends"

    you dont have too cry about it.......leave it too a liberal scum bag like you too make fun of his appearance and age because you cant think of any other things too say........this is a presidential election so who cares about how old he is..or what he says

    you dont have too worry about the nuclear power because dumb asses like you are not going too be managing it.

  • 1 decade ago

    What else can he say?

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.