More Nuke Power Follies

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.

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

If commercial jets had the comparative problems that nuke plants have, they would NOT exist. Your "airbag" analogy inadvertantly makes my point, because airbags came about after YEARS of push by Nader's Raiders, as the auto industry resisted the mandate pointing to cost and lying about crash injury/fatality stats. Anti-biotics were a response to a disease...no comparison to the nuke power industry history of accidents, mis-representations and the like. As for your article, here's my response

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?34387-More-Nuke-Power-Follies&p=861418#post861418

Like I said to Tommy, if the tritium contaminated water is SO safe, YOU drink and bath in it at length.
 
If commercial jets had the comparative problems that nuke plants have, they would NOT exist. Your "airbag" analogy inadvertantly makes my point, because airbags came about after YEARS of push by Nader's Raiders, as the auto industry resisted the mandate pointing to cost and lying about crash injury/fatality stats. Anti-biotics were a response to a disease...no comparison to the nuke power industry history of accidents, mis-representations and the like. As for your article, here's my response

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?34387-More-Nuke-Power-Follies&p=861418#post861418

Like I said to Tommy, if the tritium contaminated water is SO safe, YOU drink and bath in it at length.

Why aren't you calling for the banning of all coal burning due to release of radioactivity into the atmosphere?


Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.
--Euripides
 
Last edited:
Why aren't you calling for the banning of all coal burning due to release of radioactivity into the atmosphere?


Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.
--Euripides

Disappointed to see you have succumbed to the name change nonsense, Tom.
 
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.
http://www.logicalfallacies.info/presumption/false-dilemma/

So you're against nukes, and against coal. What is your alternative, Liberal?
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
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.

http://www.logicalfallacies.info/presumption/false-dilemma/

So you're against nukes, and against coal. What is your alternative, Liberal?

And as you can see, folks, this bogus MLK doesn't have the brains, honesty or integrity to discuss the FACTS I put forth, as it would lead to his either admitting their conclusion or that I was right on this point. So instead, this bogus MLK just blathers and babbles and tries to change the subject.

Different screen name, same neocon/teabagger asshole tactics. I'm done with this simpleton, and will have to endure in the near future yet another alias of his, as it's obvious this bogus MLK craves attention in the worst way.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
If commercial jets had the comparative problems that nuke plants have, they would NOT exist. Your "airbag" analogy inadvertantly makes my point, because airbags came about after YEARS of push by Nader's Raiders, as the auto industry resisted the mandate pointing to cost and lying about crash injury/fatality stats. Anti-biotics were a response to a disease...no comparison to the nuke power industry history of accidents, mis-representations and the like. As for your article, here's my response

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sho...418#post861418

Like I said to Tommy, if the tritium contaminated water is SO safe, YOU drink and bath in it at length.

Why aren't you calling for the banning of all coal burning due to release of radioactivity into the atmosphere?


Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.
--Euripides

Why are you running away from the FACT that you couldn't get past me regarding this trititum contamination in Vermont issue, as the chronology of the posts shows? If you want to start a post on coal processing pollution and the YEARS of activism to mandate better filtration systems, be my guest. In the meantime, grow a pair and deal with the subject at hand.....or bluff and bluster like you usually do. Because like Tommy, you talk a good game, but wouldn't DARE live directly in the environment that you would have others do.
 
If commercial jets had the comparative problems that nuke plants have, they would NOT exist. Your "airbag" analogy inadvertantly makes my point, because airbags came about after YEARS of push by Nader's Raiders, as the auto industry resisted the mandate pointing to cost and lying about crash injury/fatality stats. Anti-biotics were a response to a disease...no comparison to the nuke power industry history of accidents, mis-representations and the like. As for your article, here's my response

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?34387-More-Nuke-Power-Follies&p=861418#post861418

Like I said to Tommy, if the tritium contaminated water is SO safe, YOU drink and bath in it at length.

No, actually...airbags were marketed 15+ years before the idiots in Washington forced them down everyone's throat. They failed utterly and were soon dropped. Then the idiots in Washington stepped in, mandating the LETHAL power levels of the early air bags. Rather than admit they were stupid by changing the standards and recalling these assault weapons, they kept the same standards, but changed the TEST PROCEDURE so that the de-powered "second generation" bags would pass. My mother (4'11" tall) cannot safely drive my car...she has to sit close enough to the wheel that the exploding air bag would decapitate her.
 
It is hard to read this report and think it is the same incident that TCL is getting so emotional about.

Radioactive tritium found in river near Vermont Yankee plant


LITTLETON, New Hampshire (Reuters) - The Vermont Department of Health said it has found detectable traces of radioactive tritium from the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in the Connecticut River.
"We have been tracking the plume of tritium-contaminated groundwater as it moves slowly toward the river, and this new finding confirms that tritium has traveled from the Yankee site to the Connecticut River," Harry Chen, the state's health commissioner said in a statement issued on Wednesday.
The state's laboratory measured 534 to 611 picocuries of the radioactive substance per liter, a level well below the 20,000 picocuries per liter the Environmental Protection Agency suggests as the maximum threshold for drinking water, said Bill Irwin, the health department's chief of radiological and toxicological sciences.
Plant owner Entergy Corp said in a separate statement it had tested the same river water samples as the state did and found lower levels of tritium. Entergy would only specify that it registered below the official "minimum detectable" limit.
"We are very interested in working with the state to understand the discrepancy in the test results," it said.
Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin said the health department's findings were evidence of the need for the plant to dig additional wells to remove tritium from ground water and called for increased monitoring of the nuclear facility.
The announcement comes two weeks after the state announced it found traces of another radioactive isotope, strontium-90, in a fish caught in the river near the Vermont Yankee plant.
Entergy denied that its plant was the source of that radiation find.
Vermont's Senate voted in 2010 to shut down the plant in 2012. But Entergy filed suit against the state of Vermont earlier this year in an effort to keep the 39-year-old nuclear plant open. The case goes to trial next month.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission says that tritium emits a weak form of radiation, a low-energy beta particle similar to an electron. Tritium radiation does not travel far in air and cannot penetrate the skin, the agency says on its web site.
Most tritium produced in nuclear power plants stems from boron used for absorbing neutrons from the plant's chain reaction. Boron either is added directly to the coolant water or used in the control rods for the chain reaction.
As a form of hydrogen, tritium can bond with oxygen to form water. When that happens, the resulting "tritiated water" is radioactive. Nuclear plants routinely release dilute and monitored concentrations of tritiated water, NRC said.

http://news.yahoo.com/radioactive-tritium-found-river-near-vermont-yankee-plant-184050307.html
 
The state's laboratory measured 534 to 611 picocuries of the radioactive substance per liter, a level well below the 20,000 picocuries per liter the Environmental Protection Agency suggests as the maximum threshold for drinking water, said Bill Irwin, the health department's chief of radiological and toxicological sciences.

The highest level detected is 3.06% the EPA standard, and Liberal is wetting his diaper over it.
 
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
If commercial jets had the comparative problems that nuke plants have, they would NOT exist. Your "airbag" analogy inadvertantly makes my point, because airbags came about after YEARS of push by Nader's Raiders, as the auto industry resisted the mandate pointing to cost and lying about crash injury/fatality stats. Anti-biotics were a response to a disease...no comparison to the nuke power industry history of accidents, mis-representations and the like. As for your article, here's my response

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sho...418#post861418

Like I said to Tommy, if the tritium contaminated water is SO safe, YOU drink and bath in it at length.


No, actually...airbags were marketed 15+ years before the idiots in Washington forced them down everyone's throat. They failed utterly and were soon dropped. Then the idiots in Washington stepped in, mandating the LETHAL power levels of the early air bags. Rather than admit they were stupid by changing the standards and recalling these assault weapons, they kept the same standards, but changed the TEST PROCEDURE so that the de-powered "second generation" bags would pass. My mother (4'11" tall) cannot safely drive my car...she has to sit close enough to the wheel that the exploding air bag would decapitate her.

No, actually..... you are telling a bunch of lies and creating absurd scenarios, jarlaxle. Airbags were NOT fully "marketed" by every car dealership or auto companies for "15" years. Many DID NOT OFFER THE OPTION as they did NOT want to take on the added cost of installation. You have NO FACTS to back up your claim that airbags initally "utterly failed", but the CPA had provided enough fact based documentation to prove their case to the federal gov't for mandatory installation of airbags. The rest of your tale regarding "lethal" power of airbags is a collection of half truths, omissions and outright false statements in order to make your anti-gov't regulation rant seem plausible. As for the tale regarding your mom not being able to drive your car.....if indeed she is so short that she would be "decapitated" by a deploying airbag, then she is too short to see over the steering wheel and should not be driving at all. In reality, airbags save lives and prevent injuries.....a fact I can attest to personally, as two years ago some drunken fool barreled out the wrong way of an off road entrance...smashing into the rear of my car and forcing me to turn into a support pylon of a a train platform rather than spin into the on-coming lane. The impact slammed me forward. If NOT for my shoulder harness AND my airbag, I would have had a serious head injury against the steering wheel. Deal with it.

Now, unless you've got some fact based points to discuss regarding the tritium pollution in Vermont, I'll just ignore any further dodgy fantasy you may want to construct.
 
Last edited:
It is hard to read this report and think it is the same incident that TCL is getting so emotional about.

Radioactive tritium found in river near Vermont Yankee plant


LITTLETON, New Hampshire (Reuters) - The Vermont Department of Health said it has found detectable traces of radioactive tritium from the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in the Connecticut River.
"We have been tracking the plume of tritium-contaminated groundwater as it moves slowly toward the river, and this new finding confirms that tritium has traveled from the Yankee site to the Connecticut River," Harry Chen, the state's health commissioner said in a statement issued on Wednesday.
The state's laboratory measured 534 to 611 picocuries of the radioactive substance per liter, a level well below the 20,000 picocuries per liter the Environmental Protection Agency suggests as the maximum threshold for drinking water, said Bill Irwin, the health department's chief of radiological and toxicological sciences.
Plant owner Entergy Corp said in a separate statement it had tested the same river water samples as the state did and found lower levels of tritium. Entergy would only specify that it registered below the official "minimum detectable" limit.
"We are very interested in working with the state to understand the discrepancy in the test results," it said.
Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin said the health department's findings were evidence of the need for the plant to dig additional wells to remove tritium from ground water and called for increased monitoring of the nuclear facility.
The announcement comes two weeks after the state announced it found traces of another radioactive isotope, strontium-90, in a fish caught in the river near the Vermont Yankee plant.
Entergy denied that its plant was the source of that radiation find.
Vermont's Senate voted in 2010 to shut down the plant in 2012. But Entergy filed suit against the state of Vermont earlier this year in an effort to keep the 39-year-old nuclear plant open. The case goes to trial next month.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission says that tritium emits a weak form of radiation, a low-energy beta particle similar to an electron. Tritium radiation does not travel far in air and cannot penetrate the skin, the agency says on its web site.
Most tritium produced in nuclear power plants stems from boron used for absorbing neutrons from the plant's chain reaction. Boron either is added directly to the coolant water or used in the control rods for the chain reaction.
As a form of hydrogen, tritium can bond with oxygen to form water. When that happens, the resulting "tritiated water" is radioactive. Nuclear plants routinely release dilute and monitored concentrations of tritiated water, NRC said.

http://news.yahoo.com/radioactive-tritium-found-river-near-vermont-yankee-plant-184050307.html


That's because willfully ignorant wonks like Aox only read what suits them....and ignore all else, like this:


http://healthvermont.gov/enviro/rad/yankee/tritium.aspx


Investigation into Tritium Contamination at Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station

..... To date, nine out of a total of 31 groundwater monitoring wells are testing positive for tritium. Generally, the trends are downward. For example, the highest wells were near 1,000,000 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) for tritium a year ago. These were wells near the AOG tunnel and AOG building. At the end of 2010, the highest levels were near 500,000 pCi/L from wells about halfway between plant buildings and the river. Now the highest tritium levels are about 125,000 pCi/L from wells near the river.

So again, if Aox is so comfortable with drinking contaminated water, let him. I'll pass.
 
Last edited:
You got pwned on this topic more than once already..........why keep coming back for more......you say the same shit over and over and expect a new outcome ?:palm:
 
You got pwned on this topic more than once already..........why keep coming back for more......you say the same shit over and over and expect a new outcome ?:palm:

Ahhh, the rantings of our intellectually bankrupt barstool bumpkin that is Bravo. Notice folks, that Bravo can't debate worth a damn, much less present any coherent, rational and fact based points that would disprove what I've posted. No, our booze addled Bravo just mindlessly cheers any poster who takes a contrary position to me and then ignores any response I put forth. Challengingly Bravo to actually debate this issue is a waste of time, as Bravo has neither the brains, honesty or courage for that.

Back to the barstool with you, Bravo!
 
Ahhh, the rantings of our intellectually bankrupt barstool bumpkin that is Bravo. Notice folks, that Bravo can't debate worth a damn, much less present any coherent, rational and fact based points that would disprove what I've posted. No, our booze addled Bravo just mindlessly cheers any poster who takes a contrary position to me and then ignores any response I put forth. Challengingly Bravo to actually debate this issue is a waste of time, as Bravo has neither the brains, honesty or courage for that.

Back to the barstool with you, Bravo!

You better look out Bravo.
The last time I noticed anyone reapeating another person's name, in such a short time, was a girl that was infatuated with some young boy.
 
No, actually..... you are telling a bunch of lies and creating absurd scenarios, jarlaxle. Airbags were NOT fully "marketed" by every car dealership or auto companies for "15" years. Many DID NOT OFFER THE OPTION as they did NOT want to take on the added cost of installation. You have NO FACTS to back up your claim that airbags initally "utterly failed", but the CPA had provided enough fact based documentation to prove their case to the federal gov't for mandatory installation of airbags. The rest of your tale regarding "lethal" power of airbags is a collection of half truths, omissions and outright false statements in order to make your anti-gov't regulation rant seem plausible. As for the tale regarding your mom not being able to drive your car.....if indeed she is so short that she would be "decapitated" by a deploying airbag, then she is too short to see over the steering wheel and should not be driving at all. In reality, airbags save lives and prevent injuries.....a fact I can attest to personally, as two years ago some drunken fool barreled out the wrong way of an off road entrance...smashing into the rear of my car and forcing me to turn into a support pylon of a a train platform rather than spin into the on-coming lane. The impact slammed me forward. If NOT for my shoulder harness AND my airbag, I would have had a serious head injury against the steering wheel. Deal with it.

Now, unless you've got some fact based points to discuss regarding the tritium pollution in Vermont, I'll just ignore any further dodgy fantasy you may want to construct.

GM test-marketed airbags in the early 70's...they were optional in many cars, including the Olds Toronado & the Cadillac de Ville. They bombed.

My mother can see over the wheel easily (you know that, of course, and are merely trying to distract)...just raise the seat up (I prefer it all the way down) & tilt the column down, not a problem. Well, not a problem, except that to reach the pedals, she is only about 4" from the wheel. At that distance, an exploding airbag will be LETHAL. My wife's best friend is 6" shorter than my mother, she has no problem driving...except for the airbags. She has a 2001 Camaro Z28 SS...she uses a pedal extender on the clutch, and the driver's airbag is disabled.
 
You better look out Bravo.
The last time I noticed anyone reapeating another person's name, in such a short time, was a girl that was infatuated with some young boy.


Thanks for the heads up......

Sadly TC gets pwned with regularity and isn't even aware of it....its actually getting boring ...

I just love the way he addresses the entire board rather than the poster that bitch slaps him....its comical....

And how about that "bankrupt barstool bumpkin that is Bravo" line.....damn, its almost poetic.....

After a cold brew and some really hot buffalo wings with my wife, its fun to come home and piss on his head and tell him its raining....
 
Back
Top