Nuke power in the news again!

[WinterBorn]

How many people have died in Japan, as a result of the nuclear disaster?

...Okay... I'll even let you throw in the number who died at 3-Mile Island!

I'll give you a hint, it's very close to Bfoon's IQ!

First of all, the disastor with the reactors in Japan is not even close to over.

How about we look at how many died as a result of Chernobyl?



I am not saying anything negative about nuclear energy. I have been a proponent of using nuclear power for years.

But Dixie, do you really advocate building a nuclear power plant on a fault line??

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

First of all, the disastor with the reactors in Japan is not even close to over.

How about we look at how many died as a result of Chernobyl?

About 4,000... and no nuclear plant operating today is as unsafe as Chernobyl.

I am not saying anything negative about nuclear energy. I have been a proponent of using nuclear power for years.

But Dixie, do you really advocate building a nuclear power plant on a fault line??

Well, these in Japan are pretty much at the convergence of THREE fault lines.... so? The point you are missing is this... Sure it's a disaster, what has happened in Japan, and our emotions over the earthquake and tsunami are running high... and we are inundated by a sensationalist media (FOX included) who are playing up the nuclear disaster in Japan, into something it's simply not. The reactors withstood an earthquake 7 times greater than they were designed for, and the core, even with a full meltdown, is not going to create another Chernobyl. The systems in place, worked even better than could be expected...but we have flashbacks of Jane Fonda in the China Syndrome... Never let a crisis go to waste, right???

 

[Bonestorm]

About 4,000... and no nuclear plant operating today is as unsafe as Chernobyl.

I think it's a little early to hang up the Mission Accomplished banner regarding the reactors in Japan. They ain't out of the woods yet.

Well, these in Japan are pretty much at the convergence of THREE fault lines.... so? The point you are missing is this... Sure it's a disaster, what has happened in Japan, and our emotions over the earthquake and tsunami are running high... and we are inundated by a sensationalist media (FOX included) who are playing up the nuclear disaster in Japan, into something it's simply not. The reactors withstood an earthquake 7 times greater than they were designed for, and the core, even with a full meltdown, is not going to create another Chernobyl. The systems in place, worked even better than could be expected...but we have flashbacks of Jane Fonda in the China Syndrome... Never let a crisis go to waste, right???

Currently, the Fukishima event is/may be [edit: the rating is disputed at this point. That Japanese authorities claim it is a Level 4 event, others disagree and claim it is a Level 6] a Level 6 Incident (7 is the highest) on the International Nuclear Event Scale and may be the worst nuclear incident since Chernobyl. That's just facts. Sensationalist media has nothing to do with it. And they do not have the situation under control. While you may be correct that the incident will not be another Chernobyl, it's a little early in the game to call that.

Moreover, claiming that "the systems in place worked even better than could be expected" isn't very comforting at all given the current situation.

I say all this not as an opponent of nuclear power (in fact, I think the harm caused by fossil fuels, while much more dispersed and less acute, is probably on balance worse overall) but as a proponent of reality.

 

[DamnYankee]

1. The reactor was undamaged after the quake, and undamaged after the tsunami; liberals whine that it was built "on" a fault line (the entire island of Japan is on or near a fault line).
2. The explosions are from hydrogen tanks; liberals want us to use that to power vehicles.
3. The coolant failures were from the diesel generators getting flooded.

 

[WinterBorn]

Well, these in Japan are pretty much at the convergence of THREE fault lines.... so?

The point you are missing is this... Sure it's a disaster, what has happened in Japan, and our emotions over the earthquake and tsunami are running high... and we are inundated by a sensationalist media (FOX included) who are playing up the nuclear disaster in Japan, into something it's simply not. The reactors withstood an earthquake 7 times greater than they were designed for, and the core, even with a full meltdown, is not going to create another Chernobyl. The systems in place, worked even better than could be expected...but we have flashbacks of Jane Fonda in the China Syndrome... Never let a crisis go to waste, right???

So its just emotions running high? Not concern over radiation levels that are 100x normal? Not a concern about the reports coming out of Japan?

Like........

"The international nuclear agency said a fire in a storage pond for spent nuclear fuel at the Fukushima Dai-ichi complex had released radioactivity "directly into the atmosphere"."

Now, the radiation levels being 100x higher than normal is notimmediately fatal. But the long term hazards are serious. And this shit doesn't go away.

Do you think they evacuated 70,000 people because of "Jane Fonda and the China Syndrome"?

There are 3 nuclear power plants that are still in danger of a melt-down. They held up very well, but we are not out of the woods yet.




Dixie, your knee-jerk reaction and insults to my comments are pure defensive bullshit. I am not (repeat - NOT) slamming nuclear power. I am questioning the wisdom of building them on fault lines. You seem to think this is smart? You seem to think there will never be an earthquake that will do these facilities harm?

When the fallout is dangerous for centuries, don't you think we should err on the side of caution?

Japan has no other places to build. But we damn sure do. And yet we have built them on fault lines too. You think this is acceptable???

 

[WinterBorn]

1. The reactor was undamaged after the quake, and undamaged after the tsunami; liberals whine that it was built "on" a fault line (the entire island of Japan is on or near a fault line).
2. The explosions are from hydrogen tanks; liberals want us to use that to power vehicles.
3. The coolant failures were from the diesel generators getting flooded.

Whatever the reason for the coolant failure, the fact that they failed is of grave concern.

 

[Topspin]

How many of you would move to within a mile of a nuke plant or have one built that close?

 

[WinterBorn]

How many of you would move to within a mile of a nuke plant or have one built that close?

I have no problem living near a nuke plant. I did it in Chattanooga. It was more than a mile (4 or 5 miles), but I fished in the waters beside it.

 

[Topspin]

so that's why you glow in the dark!

 

[Onceler]

There is a sense w/ man & nuclear energy that it's a bit like a kid playing w/ matches. You realize that they don't really have any idea what can happen, what radiation really does in the long-term, how to safeguard these plants against all contingencies & a variety of other issues.

 

[DamnYankee]

How many of you would move to within a mile of a nuke plant or have one built that close?

Beats living near a refinery.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

dang tootin'.....we need to burn more fuzzy coal like grandpa did!.........

 

[Phantasmal]

QFT

It is the safest form of mass energy production delivered per kilowatt hour.

The left always forgets this, and then they cry when it costs $4.00 to fill up their Chinese built mopeds because the demand for oil is inflated due to their own smug sense of being well meaning and enlightened.

The rights are all for nuclear energy until they propose it is built in their backyards, then they bitch as loudly as the left! The same way with the spent fuel, who wants to store it, not us!

I hate when they just blame the left on this issue, because when push comes to shove, both sides are NIMBY!

 

[Phantasmal]

How many of you would move to within a mile of a nuke plant or have one built that close?

In all honesty, I would not want to live close to one.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

So its just emotions running high? Not concern over radiation levels that are 100x normal? Not a concern about the reports coming out of Japan?

Like........

"The international nuclear agency said a fire in a storage pond for spent nuclear fuel at the Fukushima Dai-ichi complex had released radioactivity "directly into the atmosphere"."

Now, the radiation levels being 100x higher than normal is notimmediately fatal. But the long term hazards are serious. And this shit doesn't go away.

Do you think they evacuated 70,000 people because of "Jane Fonda and the China Syndrome"?

There are 3 nuclear power plants that are still in danger of a melt-down. They held up very well, but we are not out of the woods yet.

Dixie, your knee-jerk reaction and insults to my comments are pure defensive bullshit. I am not (repeat - NOT) slamming nuclear power. I am questioning the wisdom of building them on fault lines. You seem to think this is smart? You seem to think there will never be an earthquake that will do these facilities harm?

When the fallout is dangerous for centuries, don't you think we should err on the side of caution?

Japan has no other places to build. But we damn sure do. And yet we have built them on fault lines too. You think this is acceptable???

If you listen to news reports, this is the most terrible awful thing to ever happen in the history of man... I don't consider it all that bad, given the circumstances. Sure, it's never "good" when nuclear radiation is seeping into the atmosphere, and yeah, we're not "out of the woods" yet... I agree, some really bad shit can still happen and thousands can still die... BUT, it's a miracle these facilities are still standing at all! I think it's a major testament to the structural integrity which goes into all nuclear facilities, and the layers of redundant safety and containment systems in place. I'm not trying to downplay the disaster, but it's just not as big of a deal as the media is making it out to be... that is a product of our emotions running high.

 

[Phantasmal]

Beats living near a refinery.

I use to love near one and an electrical plant. They noted my living near both in my cancer history...found both interesting.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Okay, so once again a nuclear plant disaster will put the questions to the American people (if not the international community)…..how safe are these things? Do we have a contingency plan that’s reasonable in the face of an emergency?

Now the first thing that the NRC (nuclear regulatory commission) will tell you is that the worst nuclear plant disaster that happened in the USA resulted in NO loss of life or property (Three Mile Island back in 1979) with no negative side effects or problems years later….which is not entirely true http://pittsburgh.about.com/cs/history/a/tmi.htm
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/mile-islan...ory?id=9152035

I’m sure that all the industrial countries around the world that have had nuclear power plants operating for decades without any major incidents will look at Japan and call it an unfortunate and unforeseen phenomena, just as Chernobyl was in Russia …. as no one could predict an earthquake and tsunami in Japan affecting the power plants, and no (American) plant has the design of the old Chernobyl plant. They’ll point to the clean efficiency of nuclear power.

What they WON’T discuss is the following nagging little details…..like the fact that nuclear power plants have NOT delivered the promise of “cheap electricity” in many parts of this country as well as the rest of the world …. like the fact that any changes to surrounding environments due to occasional venting (gas or liquid) is only looked at as non-harmful in the present….or that all the well managed procedures for storage of the deadly waste is just a TEMPORARY procedure that future generations will have to deal with.

Here’s my point: with hydro, geo-thermal, wind, solar, oil, gas energy sources, even if you have a disaster like a natural gas explosion or oil plant explosion, it is contained within a specific radius, and can in a relative short time be cleaned up and repaired. That is NOT the case when nuclear power is involved. Also, people exposed to cancer causing radiation levels may not show symptoms for decades.

People should look to Japan as a wake up call and to force their leadership and industry to RE-THINK the devotion to nuclear power in it’s present form.

Those nuclear rectors are a fifty year old design, it's like trying to compare a model T Ford with a Toyota Prius when comparing them to modern designs. Even so there has been no breech of any of the pressure vessels, you would soon know if that had been the case as there would have been caesium and strontium isotopes being detected in the atmosphere by Russian and US monitoring stations. I had wondered how long it would be people would use this to try to ban nuclear energy altogether, it's one of the reasons why the Saudis have such a strangehold on energy supply in the West.

What is a legitimate question though is why they were built on the Pacific coast of Honshu facing the fault line rather than the Sea of Japan coast?

I expected the first thing out of nuke power defenders mouths would be "these are old plants". Well Tom, the problems and short comings I generally cited previously exist for current nuke plants. All one has to do is a quick google on nuke power plant problems on any nation in the world that has them to see that. Case in point: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/27/nuclear-power-reactor-design

to date, the same procedure of storing spent fuel rods in pools of water exists for even the most recentely constructed nuke plants....and that is now an additional problem in Japan, as those pools were incredibly constructed on top of the containment facilities. If that water boils out, we're talking about some serious radioactive fires and smoke clouds.

Why were they constructed where in the current locations? Damned if I know...here in the US we have nuke plants near fault lines, but experts swear there's no danger and the plants have been built to withstand quakes. Probably the same type of experts were working in Japan.

Oh, our dependence to the House of Saud has NOTHING to do with nuke power....it has to do with a good percentage of American business families invested in oil wealh....read the book "House of Bush, House of Saud" by Craig Unger to get an idea.

Peoples egos, greed and stubborness regarding nuclear power is going to spell disaster down the road...people figure as long as it's not happening in their backyard, all's good until somebody knocks out the kinks in the system.....a VERY stupid attitude when we're talking about radiation poisoning.

 

[Taichiliberal]

The pinheads just couldn't wait.....its the same as an oil spill or a natural gas explosion or a gun accident or a DUI death.....
Never let even a minor crisis go to waste when political point can be made or a pinhead issue advanced.....

Bravo, you are ONE stupid man! As long as your flabby ass is not in danger, you'll toadie the corporate/wingnut conservative line until the end (of someone else's life, that is). Check the links I provided, you dolt and while you're at it, look at this http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/27/nuclear-power-reactor-design

Wake up, you intellectually impotent Bravo fool!

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Onceler
That's not necessarily true.

Just last week, I was saying that nukes should be considered if we're going to be energy independent.

I think you'd have to be kind of braindead not to at least have some pause after what has happened in Japan. Earthquakes & other natural disasters can happen anywhere.

there is a difference between pausing to make sure you have thought out the pro's and con's and running around screaming ' no more drilling ever' or 'no more nuke power ever'.

You are doing the former, taichi the latter.

No one has stated "no more drilling forever", you Super Freak-ing Liar...stop generalizing from specific cases.

And until someone can produce a method for the decontamination of the WASTE, you'd damned well better stop this shit, because leaving the problem to future generations is NOT an answer for moral, intelligent people, you Super Freak-ing Jackass.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by tom prendergast
Those nuclear rectors are a fifty year old design, it's like trying to compare a model T Ford with a Ford Prius when comparing them to modern designs. Even so there has been no breech of any of the pressure vessels, you would soon know if that had been the case as there would have been caesium and strontium isotopes being detected in the atmosphere by Russian and US monitoring stations. I had wondered how long it would be people would use this to try to ban nuclear energy altogether, it's one of the reasons why the Saudis have such a strangehold on energy supply in the West.

What is a legitimate question though is why they were built on the Pacific coast of Honshu facing the rather than the Sea of Japan coast?

exactly. the reactionary fear mongers will always exist and will always use a crisis to further their political agenda....'never let a good crisis go to waste' rahm the mayor emanuel

This isn't about politics, Yutle old thing....this is about survival! Fools like you have bought the party line by the people who have INVESTMENTS in the damned things...and you'll ignore and deny any negative information about nuke plants...until it comes knocking on YOUR doorstep.

NONE of you nuke plant defenders have addressed the infromation in the links I provided....yet you are quick to condemn people who are using FACTS in their critiques. Not surprising.