Nuclear Power is safe. Fuck you if you disagree.

I feel like I am derailing the thread here a bit, but this more important than the money supply issues.

This video is of Arkansas after earthquakes were created. These people are realizing that they are energy "hostages", and now it is directly affecting their quality of their lives in a huge way.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsBQS2vCzfs"]YouTube - Earthquake-Natural Gas Drilling Meeting Guy, AR 11/9/2010 part 3[/ame]



At this point fracking now does the following-contaminates ground water at point of injection; contaminants water that is removed from surface water after mixing with anti-corrosives, "stimulants", and anti-fungals; contaminates water when aforementioned original water is disposed of(this water is either farmed(covering it with dirt in a field) ,or, cleaned(very few water treatment plants can clean this water right now) and it is re-introduced to our environment; and now, we have the creation of earthquakes.
 


You are actually arguing that the dangers of oil and nuclear materials are comparable. I think that's my cue to get back to teh internet monies.
 
1960's Pentagon official:
'So wait a second, in addition to letting us build all the nuclear weapons we could ever fuckin want; your telling me they can Also be used to generate electricity? Gud-Dam we gotta get us some of these fuckin reactors!'
 
johnmatrix said:
It kinda sucks that all this high tech nuclear reactor technology is simply used to turn water into steam. We need to devise some way of turning nuclear energy directly into electrical energy, bypassing all the water->steam->mechanical turbine->electromagnetic conversions.
Click to expand...

Considering the billions of dollars involved in energy. I am sure they have thought about increasing efficiency once or twice.
 
Japan is rich so they can afford building nuclear reactors and spend billions of dollars maintaining them and keeping them safe and sound. But if you're a Third World country (like mine), forget it. We had a nuclear reactor but it was mothballed (suspended) for 25 years already. Turns out that it was built near a faultline. :(
 
how about that the meltdown melts through the ground and gets into the ground water.

Would you still say that there is "no danger"?

Furthermore I am not afraid of the new generations of nuclear powerplants as built in the western countries. I am more afraid of the old eastern modells built in former russian countries similar to the one used in Tschernobyl. It does not help if only we stop using this energysource. Moreover there must be a monitoring authority which is accepted by all countries using this source of energy that has wide ranging power to check and monitor those power plants. As long there is now alternative that is capable to supply enough energy I think it is difficult to stop using nuclear energy everywhere.

Additionally I think that the americans havent really felt the impact of such a situation. I have been 6 years old when Tschernobyl took place and I have been more than thousand miles away from tschernobyl but we still had many restrictions due to this incident. More over we had a 150% higher rate of cancer and others in regions wehre the radiation came down by rain. I just read that the amount of people is argued about. pro nuclear energy people say that only 60,000 people died due to the incident. Others say that more then 900,000 people died as consequence of tschernobyl and the number is still rising. And this does not count any people who had mutations and other things as they were born after the incident.

Just my 2cent :p
 
jorarulit said:
I had question on the test:

what's the most dangerous radiation rays?

a) beta rays
b) alpha rays
c) some other rays

what was the right answer?
Click to expand...

papajohn56 said:
c) some other rays. Gamma radiation is the highest energy radiation. Alpha radiation is just helium particles. Beta radiation is high energy electrons or positrons, which is ionizing but not as dangerous as gamma. Gamma is super high energy photons that are ionizing and can cause major cellular damage.
Click to expand...


Just thought I'd follow this up, alpha emitting particles are the most damaging if swallowed or let into an open wound, because then it's mutating the cells of all your internal organs, compared to gamma, the rays of which would just most likely pass straight through your organs, leaving them mostly unaffected.
 
papajohn56 said:
c) some other rays. Gamma radiation is the highest energy radiation. Alpha radiation is just helium particles. Beta radiation is high energy electrons or positrons, which is ionizing but not as dangerous as gamma. Gamma is super high energy photons that are ionizing and can cause major cellular damage.
Click to expand...


I disagree - you can't answer that correctly based on the information given to you. It's a meaningless question.


Over a short distance, alpha is the most dangerous because the size of a helium nucleus means it causes more double-strand DNA breaks. These are far more difficult for your cells to repair.

However, it can't penetrate skin, so it's only dangerous if you swallow it or inhale something which emits alpha. Polonium, the element which was used by the russians to kill Alexander Litvinenko, is an alpha emitter

Beta is similar - doesn't penetrate far, but cause quite a bit of damage if you get it inside body or two close to skin. Iodine-131 is a beta emitter, and it's one of the elements they are worried about in Japan.

Gamma is higher energy, so it penetrates a lot further, but it's less likely to cause double strand breaks.

So the question needs to be more specific... e.g. which is more dangerous if swallowed, or which is more dangerous from a distance?
 
  • Like
Reactions: JakeStratham
I think nuclear plants are safe enough. Of course they are not perfect and nothing is perfect.

If for instance we take hydroelectric power station they are not safe either. If sluice collapse watter will take a lot with it.

In Japan the problem was the place where nuclear plant was built - near by the ocean. WTF? How people can imagine to build so powerful weapon in place where tsunami and earthquakes are more than common?

Nothing is and will be 100% safe!
 
Watching TV news you'd think the end in near. So Glad for the internets.

Chernobyl was built on a shoe string budget. This will never happen in Japan or the US.
 
Two questions.

1) What type of fuckwit puts the backup diesel generators in a position to be flooded by water?

2) Which bigger fuckwit decided a nuclear power plant only needed 8 hours of battery backup?
 
papajohn56 said:
Tough call. I wouldn't put it past the oil or coal lobby to pay off some people. Nuclear needs a much better lobby, I see commercials for nat. gas and "clean coal" *bullshit* all the time.

A lot of the media talking heads were around in the late 1970s as students when they got into the whole "No nukes!" thing, so that could be part of it too.

People just are irrationally afraid of radiation and nuclear because of the bomb connotation behind it.
Click to expand...

It's basically a fact that coal power plants kill more people than nuclear power based on decades worth of data.

Hell a coal power plant spews harmful particles that shorten people's life span when it's operating properly while nuclear power spews out steam and creates a small amount of nuclear waste that can be easily managed and contained.

Ugh coal is so dirty and that stuff is spewed everywhere. It's literally shitting where you eat.
 
Question: Is it a problem that nuclear generating stations in the United States don't have a central location to dispose of their spent fuel rods? Would it be safer to build a storage facility deep underground, away from towns (desert in between CA/NV/AZ?) where all the nuclear generating stations around the US would dispose of said fuel rods?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom