Fukishima is working again

[halik]

IMO we shall see the live threatening affects beyond the bloody noses within 5 years, a few leukemias. Lots of thyroid problems, the big issues will happen 10-20 years with random pulmonary problems. It is not about fearmongering but waking people up to a very serious health issue no one wants to confront for a myriad of reasons.

Get the kids back from the iodine 131 releases would be a start. This is madness having little kids peeing the stuff out.

Fukushima Disaster BBC Report on Children and the Protection of Power Plants
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byO6lzMblC8&

I think thyroid is the one that shows up first, then leukemia and then the random cancers and mutations if anything. Either way you won't know for a while, it all depends on which isotopes of cesium ended up where.

People screaming about current health issues due to supposed contamination are either hysterical or morons.

 

[Jaskalas]

Uh, I'd like to see that evidence.

Japanese standards, like many standards around the world, are based off of American NRC standards.

There were reports back in July or August where the people who worked at the plant admitted to hearing explosions before the Tsunami.

Can't seem to find them atm, but I recall reading them.

 

[M0RPH]

What's with all the people trying to down-play this (ongoing) catastrophe?

Most of you that are mocking Steeplerot don't seem to have much to bring to the table as far as knowledge of the matter. Calling him crazy or asking what he's smoking is not a valid counterpoint.

I trust what Arnie Gunderson has to say, he knows way more about this stuff than any of you here, and he's been one of the few experts giving a truthful assessment of the situation from the beginning.

 

[rcpratt]

There were reports back in July or August where the people who worked at the plant admitted to hearing explosions before the Tsunami.

Can't seem to find them atm, but I recall reading them.

I'm okay with that. There are several hundred things that could cause explosions at a nuclear plant that are non-nuclear.

 

[JSt0rm]

What's with all the people trying to down-play this (ongoing) catastrophe?

Most of you that are mocking Steeplerot don't seem to have much to bring to the table as far as knowledge of the matter. Calling him crazy or asking what he's smoking is not a valid counterpoint.

I trust what Arnie Gunderson has to say, he knows way more about this stuff than any of you here, and he's been one of the few experts giving a truthful assessment of the situation from the beginning.

Its because they don't want to think about the problem.

 

[Nebor]

Its because they don't want to think about the problem.

I think that's mostly it. Is it going to affect me? Probably not. Is there anything I can do about it? Definitely not. Mockery is easier to muster than feigned concern, so here we are.

 

[JSt0rm]

I like you nebor :biggrin:

I still hate you but I like you.

 

[Genx87]

What's with all the people trying to down-play this (ongoing) catastrophe?

Most of you that are mocking Steeplerot don't seem to have much to bring to the table as far as knowledge of the matter. Calling him crazy or asking what he's smoking is not a valid counterpoint.

I trust what Arnie Gunderson has to say, he knows way more about this stuff than any of you here, and he's been one of the few experts giving a truthful assessment of the situation from the beginning.

You think there is any feasible way to cut 1/3rd of the power generation in the United States and make up for it using better transmission lines or wind power?

 

[RampantAndroid]

I'm loving this guy myself.

I would be curious to hear is insightful thoughts about Throium based reactors. Or how France can power most of their country off nuclear and they aren't all dead/dying/etc.

How many accidents does it take for people to see the possible damage caused by nuclear plants?

TMI - I grew up near there.
Chernobyl - the Ukraine is ruined.
Fukushima - Japan has issues now.

In nuceal fission clean? Can be. Is it dangerous? Yes.

Is a 1911 with a round chambered and the safety on safe to handle? Yes. Can the gun still go off? Easily.

We need clean energy, but we need a source of it that won't blow up in our faces.

 

[zsdersw]

What is going to replace the portion of our electricity that's currently generated by fossil fuels?

Maybe we can use all the hot air spewed from you rabid anti-nuclear folks, somehow.

Keep in mind, total energy use isn't going down, either. It not only has to be able to meet today's energy needs but future needs as well.

 

[zsdersw]

How many accidents does it take for people to see the possible damage caused by nuclear plants?

TMI - I grew up near there.
Chernobyl - the Ukraine is ruined.
Fukushima - Japan has issues now.

In nuceal fission clean? Can be. Is it dangerous? Yes.

Is a 1911 with a round chambered and the safety on safe to handle? Yes. Can the gun still go off? Easily.

We need clean energy, but we need a source of it that won't blow up in our faces.

How many proven sources of energy exist that can replace the large percentage of our energy that comes from burning fossil fuels?

I'm sick and tired of people whining about nuclear power when no suitable alternatives exist yet.

Yes, nuclear is a significant risk. It is also the only proven and reliable power generation technology we have that can even come close to meeting the demand when fossil fuels become economically scarce, which is when the sh!t really hits the fan.

 

[RampantAndroid]

How many proven sources of energy exist that can replace the large percentage of our energy that comes from burning fossil fuels?

I'm sick and tired of people whining about nuclear power when no suitable alternatives exist yet.

Yes, nuclear is a significant risk. It is also the only proven and reliable power generation technology we have that can even come close to meeting the demand when fossil fuels become economically scarce, which is when the sh!t really hits the fan.

Except we're still finding more and more reserves of fossil fuels in the US. Don't scream like we're gonna run out of fuel tomorrow, it is blatantly false. Solar is becoming more efficient. Wind and wave are being looked into. I have a hard time investing in a system which a small human error can cause to blow up. If a coal plant blows up...meh. If a nuclear plant blows up, exclusion zone.

Just because it's the best solution available now doesn't make it a good solution. There will ALWAYS be human error.

 

[chucky2]

Out of all the Gen III/III+/IV nuke plants in the world, a small human error makes them blow up? I did not know that...

 

[RampantAndroid]

Out of all the Gen III/III+/IV nuke plants in the world, a small human error makes them blow up? I did not know that...

The failsafe system is, last I checked, made by humans. TMI had a bunch of failsafes that all should have worked. But they had all be disabled by operators being forgetful, or stupid. End result was venting into the atmosphere, and radiated water escaping.

 

[chucky2]

So in the past 40 years we've made no better system design, no better training, no better knowledge? We're still at TMI levels?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

We've got platforms that can be operated via satellite links and plants that tell the EPA when they're operating outside of limits, I'm sure we can have nuke plants that notify the management and authorities when they are being operated with failsafes disabled.

 

[Bateluer]

TMI - I grew up near there.
Chernobyl - the Ukraine is ruined.
Fukushima - Japan has issues now.


We need clean energy, but we need a source of it that won't blow up in our faces.

TMI had . . . 1 death associated with it. Chernobyl was a catastrophe, caused by massive human error and faulty design, but the last I checked, there's actually quite a bit of wild life and plant life in the area. Lots of human issues, but the area isn't a dead zone.

 

[RampantAndroid]

So in the past 40 years we've made no better system design, no better training, no better knowledge? We're still at TMI levels?

So you think that errors and bugs always trend down in new versions?

TMI had . . . 1 death associated with it. Chernobyl was a catastrophe, caused by massive human error and faulty design, but the last I checked, there's actually quite a bit of wild life and plant life in the area. Lots of human issues, but the area isn't a dead zone.

You haven't read enough then. Go look up cases of how the radiation affected people, and the radiated water affected the Susquehanna river.

 

[zsdersw]

Except we're still finding more and more reserves of fossil fuels in the US. Don't scream like we're gonna run out of fuel tomorrow, it is blatantly false. Solar is becoming more efficient. Wind and wave are being looked into. I have a hard time investing in a system which a small human error can cause to blow up. If a coal plant blows up...meh. If a nuclear plant blows up, exclusion zone.

Just because it's the best solution available now doesn't make it a good solution. There will ALWAYS be human error.

I'm not saying we're going to run out of fossil fuels tomorrow, but we will run out sometime or, more accurately, supplies will get rare enough to make them economically not worth acquiring.

Yes, all technologies are improving, but energy use is increasing too. Are solar, wind, and other alternatives going to be able to meet not only current energy needs but also future needs? There's no reason to automatically assume they will.

The best course of action is to employ any and all energy generation technologies including nuclear and keep improving them to help ensure we do have non-fossil fuel alternatives ready to go.

 

[RampantAndroid]

I'm not saying we're going to run out of fossil fuels tomorrow, but we will run out sometime or, more accurately, supplies will get rare enough to make them economically not worth acquiring.

Yes, all technologies are improving, but energy use is increasing too. Are solar, wind, and other alternatives going to be able to meet not only current energy needs but also future needs? There's no reason to automatically assume they will.

The best course of action is to employ any and all energy generation technologies including nuclear and keep improving them to help ensure we do have non-fossil fuel alternatives ready to go.

But there's the deal: it isn't a problem now. When it DOES become a problem, or shows to be getting close to being a problem, we already have the reactor designs. The NRC can begin allowing fission plants to be built. It's not like this is going to be a huge problem. There's no huge rush to move to fission. There's a rush to figure out fusion, improving solar panels, figuring out PEM fuel cells/making them work well in cars and so forth.

It's a free market. Things will be figured out.

 

[zsdersw]

But there's the deal: it isn't a problem now. When it DOES become a problem, or shows to be getting close to being a problem, we already have the reactor designs. The NRC can begin allowing fission plants to be built. It's not like this is going to be a huge problem. There's no huge rush to move to fission. There's a rush to figure out fusion, improving solar panels, figuring out PEM fuel cells/making them work well in cars and so forth.

It's a free market. Things will be figured out.

The attitude typically expressed by people like you (and this thread is no exception) is that fission should never be used again. That's the wrong attitude.

 

[rcpratt]

But there's the deal: it isn't a problem now. When it DOES become a problem, or shows to be getting close to being a problem, we already have the reactor designs. The NRC can begin allowing fission plants to be built. It's not like this is going to be a huge problem. There's no huge rush to move to fission. There's a rush to figure out fusion, improving solar panels, figuring out PEM fuel cells/making them work well in cars and so forth.

It's a free market. Things will be figured out.

It's a free market and energy demands are increasing, especially in the south. Do you really think that SCANA, Southern, and STP (among others) would be getting ready to dump $5-8 billion per unit into these plants if they weren't economically viable? Even with natural gas as cheap as it is.

You also grossly underestimate the time it takes to license and build a nuke plant. First of all, neither the AB1000 or ESBWR designs have been approved, and the ESBWR still has a few years of detailed design ahead of it. The plant licensing process is a 4-6 year deal and then you're looking at least another 4 years of construction.

 

[RampantAndroid]

The attitude typically expressed by people like you (and this thread is no exception) is that fission should never be used again. That's the wrong attitude.

Where did I say never? I said that it should be a last reserve.

 

[zsdersw]

Where did I say never? I said that it should be a last reserve.

I said people like you.. not you specifically.

 

[TecHNooB]

deploy evangelion!