Welcome, Guest

TOPIC: Nuclear Power

Re: Nuclear Power 2 years, 1 month ago #8859

  • xracer
  • OFFLINE
  • Firestarter
  • Posts: 129
  • Karma: -18
Occam wrote:
Making Tokyo uninhabitable for 100 years is very unlikely as you know. People are living in Hiroshima and Nagasaki today with no ill effects, and it's only been what, 65 years? Not to mention the chain of events (meltdown, wind direction, rain) required to actually deliver a high dose to any area outside a pretty small radius.


Of course it is very unlikely if you pick a particular city, but it is not unlikely that at least one city around the globe will become uninhabitable due to a nuclear accident in the next few decades and vast regions will be affected at some smaller but significant level. In fact it has already happened in Chernobyle, and we still don't know where this disaster will end.
The more plants around the globe the more likely it will occur.



online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487...225961395484904.html


Do you think deaths from nuclear power will ever exceed that for windmills?

Re: Nuclear Power 2 years, 1 month ago #8860

  • Occam
  • OFFLINE
  • Knowledge Dangerous
  • Posts: 478
  • Karma: -782
FirepotPete wrote:
We have much better sand piles than the Russians had around Chernobyl. Don't confuse Apples with Rutabagas, please!


There is no reason to expect the next disaster to follow the same sequence of failures. There are thousands of combinations and permutations of events that could lead to a disaster. Making and operating a truly safe nuclear reactor costs more than anyone is willing to pay, and that is ignoring all the downstream problems of waste disposal etc. You can count on more accidents to follow over the next several decades.
Last Edit: 2 years, 1 month ago by Occam.

Re: Nuclear Power 2 years, 1 month ago #8862

  • xracer
  • OFFLINE
  • Firestarter
  • Posts: 129
  • Karma: -18
Occam wrote:
FirepotPete wrote:
We have much better sand piles than the Russians had around Chernobyl. Don't confuse Apples with Rutabagas, please!


There is no reason to expect the next disaster to follow the same sequence of failures. There are thousands of combinations and permutations of events that could lead to a disaster. Making and operating a truly safe nuclear reactor costs more than anyone is willing to pay, and that is ignoring all the downstream problems of waste disposal etc. You can count on more accidents to follow.


Are you saying Japan didn't get a ROI in 40 years?

Maybe a Soviet style economy, which Obama is attempting to replace ours with, isn't such a good idea, and installing Party members to run a nuclear power plant wasn't either.

Re: Nuclear Power 2 years, 1 month ago #8863

  • FirepotPete
  • OFFLINE
  • Knowledge Dangerous
  • Posts: 453
  • Karma: 5
"You can count on more accidents to follow over the next several decades."

And next year....40,000+ die on American highways, 100,000+ abortions, 250,000+ from alcohol abuse, probably another 10,000 getting hung up on the southern border fence and 500,000 die of stupidity.
That's just next year in the U.S.
I'll take my chances, only have received around 200 zoomies so far this year, years ago it would have been closer to 500 for my work. Closer to 1500 for the year, don't get anywhere near that anymore.
"Gentlemen. You can't fight in here. This is the War Room!" Gen "Buck" Turgidson

"Blessed are the Cheese Makers", Monty Python.

USSC 6039HF, 5th winter and burning strong, home made fire board and clinker pot.
Last Edit: 2 years, 1 month ago by FirepotPete.

Re: Nuclear Power 2 years, 1 month ago #8864

  • Occam
  • OFFLINE
  • Knowledge Dangerous
  • Posts: 478
  • Karma: -782
I said I would take my chances too, but don't sugar coat it.

Re: Nuclear Power 2 years, 1 month ago #8900

  • Occam
  • OFFLINE
  • Knowledge Dangerous
  • Posts: 478
  • Karma: -782
Records Show 56 Safety Violations at U.S. Nuclear Power Plants in Past 4 Years
Mishandled Radioactive Material and Failing Backup Generators Among the Violations


abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-nuclear-power...=13246490&page=1

I don't accept these uneccesary risks. UNACCEPTABE
Last Edit: 2 years, 1 month ago by Occam.

Re: Nuclear Power 2 years ago #9301

  • Occam
  • OFFLINE
  • Knowledge Dangerous
  • Posts: 478
  • Karma: -782
How do you weigh this kind of human impact in the comparative risk of different energy sources?

www.charter.net/video/play/520540

...devastating
Last Edit: 2 years ago by Occam.

Re: Nuclear Power 1 year, 11 months ago #9604

  • Occam
  • OFFLINE
  • Knowledge Dangerous
  • Posts: 478
  • Karma: -782
Wow

gizmodo.com/5806709/germanys-scrapping-a...power-plants-by-2022

Germany’s Scrapping All Nuclear Power Plants by 2022

Kat Hannaford—Following the Fukushima disaster, Germany's decided that its 17 nuclear power plants will either stay closed, or be shut down in the next 11 years, despite relying on nuclear power for almost 23 per cent of its energy.
Last Edit: 1 year, 11 months ago by Occam.

Re: Nuclear Power 1 year, 11 months ago #9790

  • Occam
  • OFFLINE
  • Knowledge Dangerous
  • Posts: 478
  • Karma: -782
Widespread US Nuclear Plant Tritium Leaks

Leading Cause: Aging and coroded cooling pipes of reactors now past their design lives.

www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/ap-impact-...um-leaks-983015.html

Re: Nuclear Power 1 year, 4 months ago #13284

  • Occam
  • OFFLINE
  • Knowledge Dangerous
  • Posts: 478
  • Karma: -782
Last Edit: 1 year, 4 months ago by Occam.
Time to create page: 0.77 seconds
Best free joomla themes