More Nuke Power Follies

Last edited:
Taichiliberal said:
The Abukumagawa River was releasing up to 52.4 billion becquerels of cesium a day, scientists say. NewsCore


A River is NOT an ocean, you pathetic nuke power toadie....but hey, nuke power company TEPCO told you everything is okay, so you just suck it up like a good little toadie, right Thomas? As your country men say, "Get stuffed"! I'm done with you.
Click to expand...

You keep saying that you are done, yet still you come back. I wonder if you noticed that I haven't insulted you once yet there is a continual stream of invective from you, do you really think that enhances your arguments.
 
Last edited:
Taichiliberal said:
The Abukumagawa River was releasing up to 52.4 billion becquerels of cesium a day, scientists say. NewsCore


A River is NOT an ocean, you pathetic nuke power toadie....but hey, nuke power company TEPCO told you everything is okay, so you just suck it up like a good little toadie, right Thomas? As your country men say, "Get stuffed"! I'm done with you.
Click to expand...

I present you with scientific facts and all you come back with is ill informed emotion laden rhetoric. Here is a fact for you, natural potassium ([SUP]40[/SUP]K) in a typical human body produces around 4,000 disintegrations per second or in other words 4000 becquerels per second. Hence in a day that is nearly 350 million becquerels. So, roughly 150 people have the same radioactivity as your river in Japan. I would suggest that you get out of New York immediately as there are millions of potentially lethal people walking around.

One more thing, they could have expressed those 54 billion becquerels as ≈1.5 curies but that doesn't sound anywhere near as impressive, now does it?
 
Last edited:
DamnYankee said:
Tom, you are killing this guy with facts, but he's arguing emotion.
Click to expand...

There is undoubtedly a significant rise in the levels of caesium 137 and it needs to be continuously monitored. But unfortunately there are too many people who have little understanding of nuclear physics and are unable to assess risk objectively. It's not helped by a plethora of blogs and websites whose only agenda is to use any adverse publicity for their own ends. I am still amazed at how those reactors which are forty years old stood up to the worst earthquake in Japanese history followed by a huge tsunami.
 
DamnYankee said:
Tom, you are killing this guy with facts, but he's arguing emotion.
Click to expand...

So like Thomas, you just ignore the FACTS that don't fit with your assertions/philosophy/beliefs. Not surprising....unless unlike Thomas YOU can produce FACTS that refute/disprove the information I presented. Seems that Thomas considers various degrees of contamination acceptable "risks"...I don't, and I'll wager if you were given a choice to live in an environment were those contamination levels were introduced into the local ecology, neither would you.
 
Taichiliberal said:
So like Thomas, you just ignore the FACTS that don't fit with your assertions/philosophy/beliefs. Not surprising....unless unlike Thomas YOU can produce FACTS that refute/disprove the information I presented. Seems that Thomas considers various degrees of contamination acceptable "risks"...I don't, and I'll wager if you were given a choice to live in an environment were those contamination levels were introduced into the local ecology, neither would you.
Click to expand...

The numbers that you provide are accurate as far as I can see, it's the interpretation that is not. It's obvious that you hate the whole idea of nuclear energy and are implacably opposed to it. The words dispassionate and objective are alien concepts to you.
 
Taichiliberal said:
So like Thomas, you just ignore the FACTS that don't fit with your assertions/philosophy/beliefs. Not surprising....unless unlike Thomas YOU can produce FACTS that refute/disprove the information I presented. Seems that Thomas considers various degrees of contamination acceptable "risks"...I don't, and I'll wager if you were given a choice to live in an environment were those contamination levels were introduced into the local ecology, neither would you.
Click to expand...

As predicted:

DamnYankee said:
Tom, you are killing this guy with facts, but he's arguing emotion.
Click to expand...
 
DamnYankee said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
So like Thomas, you just ignore the FACTS that don't fit with your assertions/philosophy/beliefs. Not surprising....unless unlike Thomas YOU can produce FACTS that refute/disprove the information I presented. Seems that Thomas considers various degrees of contamination acceptable "risks"...I don't, and I'll wager if you were given a choice to live in an environment were those contamination levels were introduced into the local ecology, neither would you.
Click to expand...

As predicted:

Originally Posted by DamnYankee
Tom, you are killing this guy with facts, but he's arguing emotion.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Folks, I took DY off of the "ignore" list because I thought he'd grown up and could actually debate an issue rationally and logically. Instead, he just cheer leads another poster who's failed to disprove any FACTS I've put forth here while adding NOTHING of worth to the discussion. As the chronology of the posts shows, DY either doesn't comprehend what he reads or lies about what has transpired.

No point in just going round in circles with Thomas, who's demonstrated an insipid stubborness and basic dishonesty when it comes to this subject....and Damned Yankee is just a crank. To the dumpster with both of them.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Folks, I took DY off of the "ignore" list because I thought he'd grown up and could actually debate an issue rationally and logically. Instead, he just cheer leads another poster who's failed to disprove any FACTS I've put forth here while adding NOTHING of worth to the discussion. As the chronology of the posts shows, DY either doesn't comprehend what he reads or lies about what has transpired.

No point in just going round in circles with Thomas, who's demonstrated an insipid stubborness and basic dishonesty when it comes to this subject....and Damned Yankee is just a crank. To the dumpster with both of them.
Click to expand...

I wonder if you know how annoyed I am with you? I disagree with DY on many things yet you have, because of your stubbornness, caused me to side with him. I am always amazed that people who don't seem to have even a smidgen of a technical background can pontificate about such matters without feeling in the least bit hesitant, contrite or abashed. Oh and by the way, hasn't anybody told you about clichés and hackneyed phrases as in your famous "chronology of the posts"?
 
Last edited:
And here's a little tidbit that preceded this thread's lead article by about 5 months. Interesting, to say the least:

GAO: leaks at aging nuke sites difficult to detect


In this Tuesday, Dec. 14, 2010 photo, a decoy sits on Bob Scamen’s pond in Braidwood, Ill. within view of the Braidwood Nuclear Power Station in Braceville, Ill., about 50 miles southwest of Chicago. Braidwood has leaked more than six million gallons of tritium-laden water in repeated leaks dating back to the 1990s _ but not publicly reported until 2005. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

— U.S. nuclear power plant operators haven’t figured out how to quickly detect leaks of radioactive water from aging pipes that snake underneath the sites — and the leaks, often undetected for years, are not going to stop, according to a new report by congressional investigators.

The report by the Government Accountability Office was released by two congressmen Tuesday in response to an Associated Press investigation that shows three-quarters of America’s 65 nuclear plant sites have leaked radioactive tritium, sometimes into groundwater.

Two senators asked the GAO, the auditing and watchdog arm of Congress, to investigate the findings of the ongoing AP series Aging Nukes, which concludes that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the nuclear power industry have worked closely to keep old reactors operating within safety standards by weakening them, or not enforcing the rules.

A third senator, independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont, said the AP series has raised disturbing allegations about safety at aging plants and reiterated his demand that the Vermont Yankee plant be shut.

In the report released Tuesday by Democrats Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts and Peter Welch of Vermont, the GAO concluded that while a voluntary initiative that industry recently adopted is supposed to identify leaks, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission doesn’t know how fast problems are detected.

“Absent such an assessment, we continue to believe that NRC has no assurance that the Groundwater Protection Initiative will lead to prompt detection of underground piping system leaks as nuclear power plants age,” the report’s authors concluded.

No leak is known to have reached aquifers that hold the drinking water supplies of public utilities, though tritium has contaminated residential drinking wells near at least three nuclear power plants.

http://truthfrequencynews.com/?p=5263
 
Taichiliberal said:
Translation: Tommy can't lie or BS his way pass the FACTS that he was wrong regarding Vermont, and therefore is going to rehash EVERY freaking nuke power excuse/justification on the books. Been there, done that. Grow up and deal, Tommy.
Click to expand...

I remember trying to have a rational discussion with TCL a few year back about tritium found in boreholes near Indian Point which has now closed down.

Here are some little known facts about tritium:

Tritium, a radioactive hydrogen isotope, is extremely rare. It's rare but it can be manufactured synthetically. Only 20 kilos are available in the world at the time, and demand is limited to 400 grams every year.

Currently, Tritium for fusion experiments like ITER and the smaller JET tokamak in the UK comes from a very specialised sort of nuclear fission reactor known as a heavy-water moderated reactor.

Tritium is a very expensive substance, with a single gram costing around $30,000. If nuclear fusion goes mainstream, demand will skyrocket, posing yet another challenge to the world’s fusion experts.
 
Last edited:
Now that our leaders cant anymore do either pandemics or baby formula what hope have we that they can manage nuclear power?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top