More Nuke Power Follies

The Dude said:
We need to go more organic with energy.
OIL
Click to expand...

I hear there's plenty of that to skim off the Gulf a few feet down...or maybe you can wait for it to wash up on shore after Irene passes? If all else fails, you can still muck around where the Valdez had that fender bender, as I understand there's STILL stuff going on there.
 
President Mittens said:
Oil is about 5% of our energy needs. It can and should be entirely replaced with nuclear power.
Click to expand...

Right! Let's just ignore the history of FACTS surrounding the operations of plants thus far regarding accidents, leaks, cancer flare-ups, etc. Oh, but that's okay, because all those new designs will fix everything, right? And if they don't, the NRC will just move the goal post as ususal right? And then there's all that lovely waste that the nuke industry promises it will eventually figure out how to safely reuse it....although total decontamination seems a bit out of their reference grid. Oh well, you have faith PM.....I'll stick to the truth, the WHOLE truth, and nothing BUT the truth. Carry on.
 
Taichiliberal said:
I hear there's plenty of that to skim off the Gulf a few feet down...or maybe you can wait for it to wash up on shore after Irene passes? If all else fails, you can still muck around where the Valdez had that fender bender, as I understand there's STILL stuff going on there.
Click to expand...

Do you understand organic oil naturally seeps up through the ocean floor. I'm going to guess that you being among the turbo-libs deserve thanks for making me rich with the artificially high oil price.
 
tom prendergast said:
Here is something for you to ponder over.

A natural nuclear reactor

Eventual final disposal of nuclear waste means that the radioactive isotopes will be buried (with appropriate barriers - see "Final disposal" above) in an appropriate disposal site for a very long time. One of the serious questions we should consider is are there going to be any problems far in the future associated with the burial of the waste. The system for final waste disposal is usually based on naturally occurring phenomena. One such natural analogue is naturally occurring nuclear reactors in Gabon, West Africa in the Oklo mine called the Oklo nuclear reactors.
About 1.7 billion years ago, deep underground in Africa, favorable natural conditions prompted nuclear reactions to take place. These natural conditions were sufficient amounts of Uranium-235 and the evolution of plants which subsequently caused rainwater to filter down through cracks in rocks. The water was necessary to slow down the neutrons emitted via uranium decay so that they could interact with other particles and produce nuclear chain reactions. The reactors operated for about 1 million years. The reactions stopped because the uranium depleted to amounts that were too small to keep the reactions going.
It has been shown that the Oklo reactors fissioned Uranium-238, Uranium-235 and Plutonium-239. This is exactly the elements that are fissioned in todays man-made nuclear reactors. Note also that there was no Plutonium-239 on earth when the Oklo reactors formed. This means that the reactors themselves must have produced this isotope. This is also the case for man-made nuclear reactors.
Once the natural reactors burned out they left radioactive nuclear waste. This waste is very similar to the waste generated by nuclear power stations. The nuclear waste was held in place deep underground by granite, sandstone and clays surrounding the reactors' site. The important point is that the waste has not moved much over approximately 2 billion years (see the fact sheet from Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, USA and the article by Walton and Cowan from the "Proceedings of a Symposium on the Oklo Phenomenon", 1975 listed in the bibliography at the end of this section).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklo

http://nuclearinfo.net/Nuclearpower/WebHomeWasteFromNuclearPower
Click to expand...


And your point? Because newsflash, various plants operating today are doing so NOT buried ( I note your little tidbit NEVER states exactly how far down) beneath the Earth's NATURAL containment system. And all one has to do is just a quick fact check to see the history of nuke power plants accidents, leaks, and waste containment problems.....because WHATEVER man does with his nuke power plants and it's waste is NOT "natural".

Jeez, you're such a parrot on this subject Tommy.
 
The Dude said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
I hear there's plenty of that to skim off the Gulf a few feet down...or maybe you can wait for it to wash up on shore after Irene passes? If all else fails, you can still muck around where the Valdez had that fender bender, as I understand there's STILL stuff going on there.
Click to expand...

Do you understand organic oil naturally seeps up through the ocean floor. I'm going to guess that you being among the turbo-libs deserve thanks for making me rich with the artificially high oil price.
Click to expand...

Do YOU understand the difference between natural sepage and artificially induced spills? Big difference, Dude...or were you asleep during the recent Gulf offshore accident? Or the Exxon/Valdez incident?

And IF I were gullible enough to buy that you're "rich" but wasting time posing as a willfully ignorant corporate toadie on these boards, I would clue you in that it was the Wall St. speculators that made you rich, not me (an Independent) or liberals or progressives or Dems or Repubs or new conservatives or tea party or oathers or birthers or threepers. Please get up to speed before you type, Dude....makes you look less foolish.
 
Look it up libtard. Oil is way more than 5 percent.
Not that many of you turbo libs study science in college, but there is this well proven theory in economics of supply and demand.
 
The Dude said:
Look it up libtard. Oil is way more than 5 percent.
Not that many of you turbo libs study science in college, but there is this well proven theory in economics of supply and demand.
Click to expand...

Follow the chronology of the posts, my intellectually challenged Dude, no one is contesting your moot points about oil...I just pointed out what information was left out, and also how your humping for the nuke power industry overlooks the history of problems it entails. Get it together, Dude....I'm embarassed for you.
 
Taichiliberal said:
And your point? Because newsflash, various plants operating today are doing so NOT buried ( I note your little tidbit NEVER states exactly how far down) beneath the Earth's NATURAL containment system. And all one has to do is just a quick fact check to see the history of nuke power plants accidents, leaks, and waste containment problems.....because WHATEVER man does with his nuke power plants and it's waste is NOT "natural".

Jeez, you're such a parrot on this subject Tommy.
Click to expand...

I was answering a point made by Wandering Bear about nuclear waste being dangerous. I find it very hard to discuss anything with you because you have this black and white agitprop approach to almost every topic.
 
Last edited:
The Dude said:
I'm humping for nukes, please tell me the drugs you are on I'd like to try them. I'm for organic energy not nuke waste
Click to expand...

Sorry Dude, drug addled convoluted conversation seems to be your forte at this point. Like I said, NO ONE is contesting your moot points about oil....all I did was point out some of the easily referenced problems with the oil industry. Deal with it.

If you and I are on the same level regarding nuke plants, then you'll have to be more clear as to your position, as I can only go by what you post here.
 
tom prendergast said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
And your point? Because newsflash, various plants operating today are doing so NOT buried ( I note your little tidbit NEVER states exactly how far down) beneath the Earth's NATURAL containment system. And all one has to do is just a quick fact check to see the history of nuke power plants accidents, leaks, and waste containment problems.....because WHATEVER man does with his nuke power plants and it's waste is NOT "natural".

Jeez, you're such a parrot on this subject Tommy.
Click to expand...

I was answering a point made by Wandering Bear about nuclear waste being dangerous. I find it very hard to discuss anything with you because you have this black and white agitprop approach to almost every topic.
Click to expand...

And I was responding to your usual rote of data that is your standard response to a direct situation. You're full of it Tommy, plain and simple. The chronology of the post shows how I logically deconstructed your pro-nuke power clap trap with simple analysis based on ALL the facts regarding this one incident in Vermont. And any high school kid can go to the library and do some basic research regarding the TRUE nature of nuke power waste and it's current and pending problems to see what a little parrot with delusions of intelligence you are on this one particular subject. But do keep blowing smoke and telling yourself otherwise, Tommy.....and let us ALL know when you're going to take that Tokyo fish dinner vacation with the family after you stock up on water laced with 20K pCi/L of tritium. Carry on.
 
Taichiliberal said:
And I was responding to your usual rote of data that is your standard response to a direct situation. You're full of it Tommy, plain and simple. The chronology of the post shows how I logically deconstructed your pro-nuke power clap trap with simple analysis based on ALL the facts regarding this one incident in Vermont. And any high school kid can go to the library and do some basic research regarding the TRUE nature of nuke power waste and it's current and pending problems to see what a little parrot with delusions of intelligence you are on this one particular subject. But do keep blowing smoke and telling yourself otherwise, Tommy.....and let us ALL know when you're going to take that Tokyo fish dinner vacation with the family after you stock up on water laced with 20K pCi/L of tritium. Carry on.
Click to expand...

I frankly do not know where to begin with this rant. It is almost as if a TCL troll is posting this stuff.
 
Taichiliberal said:
... Again, tritium is NOT suppose to be there at all....and if 20K pCi/L is so acceptable to you, why don't YOU drink the regularly filtered water from that water table or or use it to water your lawn where your kids/relatives/neighbors play. I wouldn't, but hell, it's no big deal to you, right?
Click to expand...
Why are you acting irrational, Liberal?

Scientists have never observed any health effect in human populations from radiation doses less than 10,000 mrem. This may be because these effects occur too infrequently to be distinguished from normal occurrences, or it may be that there are no effects from these low levels because the body repairs itself. A 1990 National Institutes of Health study of populations living near nuclear facilities (including SRS) found no evidence that an excess occurrence of cancer had resulted from living near these facilities.
Click to expand...
http://www.srs.gov/general/news/factsheets/het.pdf

Would you rather breathe dirty air from coal plants?
 
Taichiliberal said:
And I was responding to your usual rote of data that is your standard response to a direct situation. You're full of it Tommy, plain and simple. The chronology of the post shows how I logically deconstructed your pro-nuke power clap trap with simple analysis based on ALL the facts regarding this one incident in Vermont. And any high school kid can go to the library and do some basic research regarding the TRUE nature of nuke power waste and it's current and pending problems to see what a little parrot with delusions of intelligence you are on this one particular subject. But do keep blowing smoke and telling yourself otherwise, Tommy.....and let us ALL know when you're going to take that Tokyo fish dinner vacation with the family after you stock up on water laced with 20K pCi/L of tritium. Carry on.
Click to expand...

I have never stated that nuclear energy is without attendant riks but then again virtually everything in modern society has an element of danger. Technology moves on, if that wasn't the case then we would still be flying in propeller driven planes, driving around in cars without airbags, ABS brakes and seat belts and exposed to a world without antibiotics. I commend this article from Pittsburgh University for your attention.

http://www.phyast.pitt.edu/~blc/book/chapter8.html
 
Last edited:
Aoxomoxoa said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
And I was responding to your usual rote of data that is your standard response to a direct situation. You're full of it Tommy, plain and simple. The chronology of the post shows how I logically deconstructed your pro-nuke power clap trap with simple analysis based on ALL the facts regarding this one incident in Vermont. And any high school kid can go to the library and do some basic research regarding the TRUE nature of nuke power waste and it's current and pending problems to see what a little parrot with delusions of intelligence you are on this one particular subject. But do keep blowing smoke and telling yourself otherwise, Tommy.....and let us ALL know when you're going to take that Tokyo fish dinner vacation with the family after you stock up on water laced with 20K pCi/L of tritium. Carry on.
Click to expand...

I frankly do not know where to begin with this rant. It is almost as if a TCL troll is posting this stuff.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, another intellectually bankrupt clown who cannot logically or factually refute the information I post....so he waste time and space to let everyone know that he has NOTHING to say. Way to go, Ax....now, give us all a predictable school yard retort or continued bluff!
 
Martin Luther King Jr. said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
... Again, tritium is NOT suppose to be there at all....and if 20K pCi/L is so acceptable to you, why don't YOU drink the regularly filtered water from that water table or or use it to water your lawn where your kids/relatives/neighbors play. I wouldn't, but hell, it's no big deal to you, right?
Click to expand...


Why are you acting irrational, Liberal?

What's "irrational" about the questions I asked, or for that matter the facts I presented?


Scientists have never observed any health effect in human populations from radiation doses less than 10,000 mrem. This may be because these effects occur too infrequently to be distinguished from normal occurrences, or it may be that there are no effects from these low levels because the body repairs itself. A 1990 National Institutes of Health study of populations living near nuclear facilities (including SRS) found no evidence that an excess occurrence of cancer had resulted from living near these facilities.
Click to expand...


http://www.srs.gov/general/news/factsheets/het.pdf


The DOE states the “maximum contaminant level developed by the Environmental Protection Agency for tritium in drinking water supplies is 20,000 pCi/L or 0.02 microcuries per liter (a picocurie is a millionth of a microcurie). Higher concentrations can be present in water at facilities that produce and utilize tritium, including certain DOE sites.”

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16866


Would you rather breathe dirty air from coal plants?
Click to expand...

Nope....would you rather drink/bath in the water at the tritium levels listed in the link I provided for an unlimited period of time? Or would you rather wait for the concentrations to reach the river and concentrate in the animal life? Remember, the measures currently set up in Vermont was to prevent the contaminated water from getting even that close to the River.....they failed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top