Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube 2020 ENERGY CONFERENCE - PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!!

2020 Energy Science & Technology Conference
PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!
http://energyscienceconference.com


Go Back   Energetic Forum > >
   

Renewable Energy Discussion on various alternative energy, renewable energy, & free energy technologies. Also any discussion about the environment, global warming, and other related topics are welcome here.

* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 03-23-2011, 04:51 PM
GeoffrySqueeb GeoffrySqueeb is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5
Can the Japan Nuclear crisis happen in North America?

I was wondering this very question myself, and I googled it, and found this article:

http://abetterenergyplan.ca/#/news/accident-here?

Some of the points that were made, particularly this one:

Quote:
The short answer is, "No."

Let me give you the reasons. When I say that similar nuclear emergencies could not happen here, I am not writing with a sense of complacency. Safe operations and emergency preparedness are a priority at Ontario Power Generation. Along with other nuclear operators in the world, we will closely examine the Japanese experience to learn how we can make our operations even safer.

It is important to note some basic differences between the conditions in Japan and those of Ontario's 16 operating nuclear reactors.

Japan is in a region where severe earthquakes and tsunamis are not uncommon. Ontario is not such a region. Ontario's reactors are at two sites on Lake Ontario and one site on Lake Huron where major earthquakes are not expected.

Similarly, the Great Lakes are highly unlikely to produce a tsunami that would damage the operations of our nuclear units. They are in a geologically-stable region with a geologically-stable shoreline.
Now I'm sure that not every NA place is exactly like this, but it did bring up a good point: that the conditions associated with the Fukoshima disaster are not going to crop up in other parts of the world. Ontario (where I'm from) is essentially free of these sorts of natural disasters, and depending on where you're from, is probably true for you as well.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann
Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets

  #2  
Old 03-23-2011, 06:38 PM
Freezer's Avatar
Freezer Freezer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 76
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffrySqueeb View Post
I was wondering this very question myself, and I googled it, and found this article:

http://abetterenergyplan.ca/#/news/accident-here?

Some of the points that were made, particularly this one:



Now I'm sure that not every NA place is exactly like this, but it did bring up a good point: that the conditions associated with the Fukoshima disaster are not going to crop up in other parts of the world. Ontario (where I'm from) is essentially free of these sorts of natural disasters, and depending on where you're from, is probably true for you as well.
Short answer is yes..

It can and will happen, it's only a matter of time.. Nobody.., no country is immune to the forces of nature. Man likes to think he is invincible, but history has given us the answers. Sorry to say there is a much higher danger coming soon that will dwarf anything seen to date, in modern times that is.. Just check 2000 feet underwater off the coast of Bimini to see what I mean..

You have nothing to lose in being prepared, and educating yourself on the dangers that lies ahead.

2011- Economic collapse.
2012- Solar flares, every conceivable natural disaster you can imagine.

Not to be a downer or anything..
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-23-2011, 07:58 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
Have to agree, obvious answer is YES!!

Will it be exactly the same? probably not.The very fact that the writer is stating they will study the disaster in Japan, seeking lessons learned, is a concession; humans make mistakes, develop 'blind spots', greed, hubris and beurocratic/hierachy inertia.
There probably will be changes made, taking into an account a tsunami.And then, some terrorist will fly an airliner into one.Or, someone will drop a wrench; something totally foreseeable with hindsight, and totally unforeseen beforehand.
Hindsight; "The FIRST thing you see, when you jerk your head outs your *ss!"
4 weeks ago, eveyone thought the japanese nuclear program was the 'Gold Standard'.
Frankly, the answer is so obvious, just based on the mainstream news coverage, that I can't believe your even asking the question.Nuff said.Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-23-2011, 10:51 PM
bugler bugler is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 390
A lesson learned from the disaster is that behind every single disaster/terrorist atact/etc there is an israeli company in charge of the security.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-24-2011, 08:29 AM
Gdez Gdez is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 104
Nuclear accident

Here is an article that cites a 1985 NRC report;
“Serious Danger of a Full Core Meltdown”: Update on Japan’s Nuclear Catastrophe
Just something to think about.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-24-2011, 08:30 AM
Gdez Gdez is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 104
Nuclear accident

Here is an interesting article;
“Serious Danger of a Full Core Meltdown”: Update on Japan’s Nuclear Catastrophe
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-24-2011, 10:05 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,637
Wake up people

Yes it can and it will if you dont do something about it.

The problem lies with the mode of thinking in oligarchs, politicians and scientists.

Have you read EcoScience by JP Holdren? Yes he is Obaaaaahmas science Czar

Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment by Paul R. Ehrlich, Anne H. Ehrlich, John P. Holdren

You will read about forced medication forced sterilization and much worse and this is the text book the world is using.

The deaths caused by the incident at Fukushima are few as of today and that is all they think of, but will likely be millions in the future without even taking into consideration the people that will be damaged and the birth defects.

They think about if it is possible, and how to make political and financial gain. They only think of consequences as collateral damage and how they can make the masses pay for that with insurance. They have no conscience, no empathy and no morals.

It is up to us, the ones who will be dying of leukaemia and cancer, to bring up the issue and make everyone aware. By doing this we will be able to stop them, if we dont they will continue at our expense.

Notice how they used this crisis to distract people while they start a new war, they never even went to congress, they just did it. Never let a good crisis go to waste.

Never let a good crisis go to waste - Google Search

We are 10 years into world war III and most people dont even know.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-24-2011, 01:49 PM
brenie brenie is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 79
Thumbs up

Hi all, ofcorse it will happen. The only reason we have nuclear plants is because of the vast profits too the 'nuke industrial complex'. Take that profit away and the answer would be "are you mad" we dont even know how to deal with the waste !
And Mbrownn points out it is part of the bigger plan.
Henry Kissenger did the report for the UN, he spelt it all out, he said we have to get rid of 1.6 billion. Mind you that in the sixtys, could be a few bill ion more now.
And he suggested nuke war and accidental. So I assume he and his sort are rubbing their hands and suggesting 'well thats a start.
Chernobyl was not in a danger zone,Sellerfield UK, nor 3mile island.
Wherever they are they are bombs waiting for the fuse to ignite.

We might now just have an answer to the Nuclear lobby, google Andrea Rossi,
and let's spread the word now.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-24-2011, 02:31 PM
Iotayodi's Avatar
Iotayodi Iotayodi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 322
It already has but not to the extent of Japan or Russia.
Three Mile Island accident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We have them on the coast here in Florida. They are a perfect terrorist target. Then there is the storage problem of spent rods. Fault lines are all around the world.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-24-2011, 07:39 PM
boguslaw's Avatar
boguslaw boguslaw is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,494
In 1937 Joe Brandt saw an Earthquake sink Los Angeles, much of California and Japan ?
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-24-2011, 10:34 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
Actually

I hate to say it, but Kissinger's right.(Or whoever said it) There are way to many F*cking people in the world.Too little food, energy and resources to support the population, and its growing by like,.... a thousand a minute.

Problem with energy is consumption, and I don't mean conservation, although per capita use is steadily increasing. I mean just too many people wanting to use energy to do everything, electric backscratcher syndrome.

But ultimately, just too many people.So, whether Mother Nature evens things up, or we do it to ourselves as a part of some world domination conspiracy, or do it to ourselves due to human nature; Greed, hubris, short sightedness, etc. ultimately we are doomed to experience the 'end times'.

Whether it will truly be the end of humans, or just a severe reduction in population, with us going back to our 'natural' state as hunter gatherers (scavengers) remains to be seen."May you live in INTERESTING times"

To say "This is what they are doing, and we should call them on it. Get the people aroused to stop them!!" What is the alternative you propose? Continued unrestricted population growth? To what end????Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #12  
Old 03-24-2011, 11:06 PM
brenie brenie is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 79
Smile

Hi dutch, good points raised but c'mon use your inititive.
First we eat the rich, marinated a few herbs could be palatable.
Next we cultivate their golf courses, that much land would probably supply enough wholesome healthy food for half the world population ( perhaps I agzadgerate ) but you get my drift.
And let's not stop there as i'm in the uk I include football picthes, I would prefer fildes ful of cabages, rather than pay someone 10'000 a week to kick a lump of leather around for 90mins. We are out of our minds, out of our frigin minds 10,000 frigin . c'mon, dutch lets have a few more suggestions.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-25-2011, 01:09 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchdivco View Post
I hate to say it, but Kissinger's right.(Or whoever said it) There are way to many F*cking people in the world.Too little food, energy and resources to support the population, and its growing by like,.... a thousand a minute.

Problem with energy is consumption, and I don't mean conservation, although per capita use is steadily increasing. I mean just too many people wanting to use energy to do everything, electric backscratcher syndrome.

But ultimately, just too many people.So, whether Mother Nature evens things up, or we do it to ourselves as a part of some world domination conspiracy, or do it to ourselves due to human nature; Greed, hubris, short sightedness, etc. ultimately we are doomed to experience the 'end times'.

Whether it will truly be the end of humans, or just a severe reduction in population, with us going back to our 'natural' state as hunter gatherers (scavengers) remains to be seen."May you live in INTERESTING times"

To say "This is what they are doing, and we should call them on it. Get the people aroused to stop them!!" What is the alternative you propose? Continued unrestricted population growth? To what end????Jim
I totally disagree.

Populations stabilise and even shrink once a moderately high standard of living is reached.

In the UK we have 36 million indigenous people, down from 50 million and I dont think that is all down to the eugenics policies and the US is the same. The only reason the population in these countries is increasing is the questionable immigration policies.

The world is full of empty space, just look on google earth.

Our food production is low because of set aside policies, over control of the food producers and big pharma. Not to mention that we are in a period of low CO2 at the moment. 80% of the farmland in the densely populated Philippines is now unused (except for the occasional grazing goat) Monsanto rice is less productive than native varieties unless you use large amounts of Monsanto fertilizer. Then it cross pollinates and reduces the productivity of other species. I refer you to Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment by Paul R. Ehrlich, Anne H. Ehrlich, John P. Holdren its all in there.

Power is a problem but mainly because of the totally inefficient way we produce, distribute and consume it. I know you understand that.

It does not do, to blame others, if you want to know who to blame just take a look in the mirror (quote from V for Vendetta, one of my favourite films )

Lets discuss the problems and how to solve them, without prejudice or malice and please dont introduce eugenics as a way to solve anything..

The thread asks the question Can the Japan Nuclear crisis happen in North America? I think the answer is yes. The question now is What are we going to do about it?
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-25-2011, 04:57 AM
bolt1 bolt1 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 61
When the 9.1 quake hits California VERY soon and half of it slides into the sea then you will see how good the safety features really are....not. You can never make a pressurised water highly radioactive reactor safe especially one that is mounted on the land surface.

Now if they built them at least 500 ft below the surface that would make them a bit safer cos when everything goes tits up just plug the hole up with huge concrete plug and write it off.

The real serious answer is ambient pressure Thorium Fluoride reactors then they can never go unstable. If you lose power you let the salt drain out into a tank and its dead. Its as simple as that. Not only but they are 500% higher efficient then breeder reactors. Cost a 1/3 of the price and the fuel - Thorium is found in vast quantities all over the earth. One small lump of thorium has enough energy to power a town for a year. Its 1960's and 70's proven but shelved in favour of more expensive technology as breeders cos they can extract weapons grade plutonium to make nukes.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-25-2011, 10:08 AM
mbrownn mbrownn is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,637
no doubt they could put the waste products in toothpaste

only joking
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-25-2011, 04:57 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
I may be mistaken

I haven't looked it up, but I thought eugenics involves someone deciding WHO should be allowed to breed.I don't believe I was saying that.However, it should be noted that 'civilised' man does seem to do things which work at direct cross purposes to 'natural selection'.
And yes, a big part of the problem is this 'civilised' lifestyle of congregating in large cities.Of depending on long frail supply lines to provide us, for a price, with the necessities of life.
On an individual basis, by breaking our dependence on these supply lines, and developing self sustainment methods of supplying ourselves with the necessities, we address this in our own lives.
In addition, we are 'voting with our feet', and our 'pocketbook'; we are refusing to feed the machine.Unfortunately, I don't see enough people taking this coarse of action to make a difference.
Its like the Titannic is headed for an iceberg.Talking to the Captain is useless, he's screaming "Full speed ahead". Some passengers and crew are out on deck, arguing about the proper arrangement of the deck chairs. (Political parties). Other wealthy passengers are standing off to the side, making bets on the outcome of these arguments (Wall street). A few passengers are at the back of the boat, quietly lowering a lifeboat, knowing that the ship is going to hit an Iceberg, and they are doing the only thing they can; removing themselves from the equation.THATS what I'm talking about.Its not a great solution, maybe not even a good solution.I simply see it as the only viable solution for me.I don't believe I am going to have any success pursuading the Captain to change coarse, and getting drawn into the arguments on the deck chairs is fruitless, as is participating in the gambling.What good is the $ going to be, when the ship goes down?
Anyway, if I have seem to have drawn this topic off coarse, the original premise is absurd.The answer is "YES, Of Coarse it could and sooner or later will happen here." I've then gone on to talk a little about what I am doing about it, in my life.Trying to work towards a life where I don't support the beast, with my $ or energy or consumption.Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-30-2011, 04:03 PM
o541o o541o is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5
Hi all. Been lurking this forum for awhile but this is my first post.

There are "inactive" fault lines all over the place. A well known one is the New Madrid fault line in the U.S. which basically follows the Mississippi River. It caused a massive quake in the early 1800's that was strong enough to cause things to fall off of shelves and break windows in NY some 1600(?) miles away. The Mississippi River actually ran backwards for a few days.

Scientists say it's not likely to do any shifting soon if ever but if they're wrong? What if the volcano called Yellowstone starts to rumble? Might that change something in this "extinct" fault line? New Madrid pretty much splits the US north/south. Could a massive quake on the west coast do something to the plate(s) west of the New Madrid fault line? How could anyone possibly predict these unknowns with any degree of accuracy?

This fault line also just happens to run perilously close to the largest concentration of reactors in the US in the state of Illinois and a couple of them are practically right next to the river/fault line. If they (or the on-site waste) were to leak into the river it could poison everything clear down into the Gulf of Mexico and beyond. Bottom line is that we know this fault has shifted at least twice in the last 2000 years. It *could* happen again.

Well I've rambled enough. Please excuse me if I don't feel safe!
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-30-2011, 07:47 PM
boguslaw's Avatar
boguslaw boguslaw is online now
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,494
We should stop ALL nuclear plants in the world and pray.


I may sound as madman but consider the possibility that our solar plane is flipping in grand cycle taking 26000 years while passing the galactic eclipse.
It's very probable if that theory is truth , California and Japan will sink and many coasts also like predicted , when Earth change rotation direction and poles shift.

Ok, I won't say it again, it's too scary.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-30-2011, 09:51 PM
Gdez Gdez is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 104
Lowering lifeboat

Sorry to sound pesimistic, because I always thought the survivalist guys were a little nutty. But at this point I'm starting to wonder if I shouldn't start digging. I am also trying to vote with my wallet and grow and raise my own food, but too many people seem too comfy, and If there is change happening, I sure can't see it. It's unbeleivable that conservation alone isn't preached more. I have made a significant change in my lifestyle and you know, I not only feel better physically but mentally also, and I'm not reading by candlelite. My carbon footprint has went down tremedously with just one simple thing...Information. It's about getting the word out too. Lead by example and let other people know what you are doing and encourage them to do the same. I would love to move out to the mountains of WV and hide, but as seen with this disaster in Japan, maybe you can only run so far. If we don't start trying to change now, with our addiction to energy, it seems that it willl get the best of us.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-31-2011, 07:00 AM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 11,029
radioactive milk in spokane

Radiation in milk here in my town:
'Minuscule Amount' Of Radiation Found In Spokane Milk - News Story - KXLY Spokane

Miniscule safe amounts of course!
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 03-31-2011, 02:28 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
Another part of the poorly executed disinformation

Campaign, is a lot more than semantics.There wasn't radiation in the milk, there was radioactive fallout.When they do all these comparisons to X-rays, cat scans, or airplane trips, they are talking about radiation. Radiation is energy that goes right thru you.When they are talking about radiation in food, soil, air or water, they are talking about radioactive fallout, which is giving off radiation.Big difference, cause if you ingest it, its absorbed into your body, where it sits there in close proximity to cells, for a long time while continueing to emit radiation.
If your gonna die from radiation, it will get you within 30-60 days; watch the workers at fukdupashima.Deaths from radioactive fallout will take longer.Thyroid cancers first, lukemia later, and for generations after.
Saw they are still calling Chernobyl "The worst nuclear accident in history", haven't really got it yet that thats not the case, anymore.Gonna have to change that international scale for nuclear accidents, too.from 1-7 to at least 1-8, if not 1-10.Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #22  
Old 03-31-2011, 06:54 PM
GeoffrySqueeb GeoffrySqueeb is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5
Well, I know that Nuclear Power is a pretty reliable form of energy, and wind and solar basically aren't. Who knows who is pushing for wind and solar, because they do not produce power all of the time! How can people not understand that you can't power your homes only when the wind blows? Enjoy the rolling blackouts. This video puts it pretty nicely:

Better Energy Plan

You ever think who is making us build giant wind and solar farms, even though they don't work as advertised? Could there be someone behind it all?
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-31-2011, 07:23 PM
bugler bugler is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 390
You might find interesting the following article about the coming nuclear disaster: Japan's Earthquake - Natural Or Engineered?

Now the Mexico Guld disaster seems like a picnic when it is extremely terrible.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-31-2011, 08:20 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
Geoffrey

If what you are looking for are reassurances that 'It can't possibly happen here', well, as you demonstrated in your first post, you can certainly find plenty of such reassurances, from nuclear industry experts, and Gov't regulators.
If you are looking for those to argue the other side, the responces to your post make it obvious that their are plenty "tree hugging anti-nuke hippies" to argue 'it could, can and will happen here.'
If you are truly interested in an answer to your question, wouldn't it be great of you could find someone with the resources to really research the question, who would be equally unswayed by the arguments of either those with a vested interest in Nuclear Power, or those who might be basing their arguments on fear.Who would have the skill set to objectively evaluate accurately risk and have a strong motivation to do so.
We have such an entity; The Insurance industry. Thats what they DO.
If they detirmined that the 'nuclear experts' are right; that Chernoble was due to antiquated soviet technology, was basically being held together with baling wire and bandaids, and that such a thing couldn't happen here, they would jump to offer to insure nuclear power plants.Collect premiums on something your never going to have to pay out claims on; a dream come true!
If, on the other hand, they detirmined that it is possible that a nuclear catastrophe COULD occur at a modern plant in North America, but that even if that happened, that there are so many redundant safety features that there would be no 'collateral damage'; no property damage, loss of life, etc. beyond the plant, then they would be happy to offer the operators liability insurance, while refusing to offer the owners plant insurance.
They offer neither.All have to be funded by Gov't backed loan guarantees, because no one who's job it is to figure the odds, likes the bet.
Insurance companies insure all sorts of things. No 'Big project' (commercial project) can happen without insurance of some sort.Movies are insured against the star dieing half way thru production, the twin towers were insured, both during their construction and once completed, etc.
And yet these cold, pragmatic money grubbing a**holes looked at nuclear power, and said,..."Pass".Nuf said? Jim
__________________
 

Last edited by dutchdivco; 03-31-2011 at 08:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-31-2011, 11:09 PM
brenie brenie is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 79
Hi Dutch and others. Did you say 'We have such an entity; The Insurance industry. Thats what they DO' ?
That would be the same insurance industry that paid out millions of $ on the 'three towers' I presume after a full and indipendent professional investigation. Oh yes we can trust them for sure !

Regards, Bren.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-01-2011, 12:58 AM
Altair Altair is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 107
Nuclear energy is easily the most polluting energy source we have, well above fossil fuel.
The radioactive residue has to be put somewhere, but of course, nobody wants it. It will heavily pollute the environment where it is stored, for thousands of years. That's why most nuclear plants are stocked full of spent fuel.

The second source of pollution is much less obvious, but still important; it is the large amounts of heat that are generated during operation of the reactors, and that have to be disposed of, usually by rejecting it as hot water in the adjacent lakes and rivers.

The modern reactors are said to be very safe, but that's only as long as everything is working correctly. If something major happens, the whole plant immediately becomes a liability because EVEN when shut down, every nuclear reactor needs 3 highly important things:

1- A constant supply of clean water to continue the constant cooling of decay heat in the reactor, and also in the spent fuel pool.
2- A stable and constant supply of electricity to run all the controls and equipment.
3- A constant supervision by trained and qualified personel.

If one of those 3 items suddenly disappears, a catastrophe will be the result.

So how can the proponents of nuclear power guarantee that those 3 conditions will always be present ? Nobody can.

A nuclear reactor CANNOT be shut down and left with the door locked, unless it has been previously totally emptied of all the fuel, and that also the spent fuel pool has been emptied too, and all that fuel has been transfered somewhere else. That may take at least one to two weeks of work.

So what do you think would happen if a sudden cataclysm were to damage part of the plant ?
The answer is right in Japan.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-01-2011, 01:13 AM
Altair Altair is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 107
Another thing,
the only reason I can see why the proliferation of nuclear energy steadily continues, is simply because those things cost a FORTUNE each, and the politicians who decide to support this technology only look at monetary side !

They know absolutely nothing about the pros & cons of the technology itself, but only see that as the perfect means to stimulate the "economy", while placing themselves in a higher situation of power.

It only money, money, money, money ...
And they think they're promoting a better and cleaner energy source.
Makes me sick.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-01-2011, 03:51 AM
aljhoa aljhoa is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,271
Nuclear Incidents Worse Than Three Mile Island

In July, 1959, the site suffered a partial nuclear meltdown that has been named "the worst in U.S. history", releasing an undisclosed amount of radiation, but thought to be much more than the Three Mile Island disaster in 1979. [21]Another radioactive fire occurred in 1971, involving combustible primary reactor coolant (NaK) contaminated with mixed fission products.
Santa Susana Field Laboratory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
YouTube - Simi Valley Nuclear Disaster

The Church Rock Uranium Mill Spill occurred in New Mexico, USA, in 1979 when United Nuclear Corporation's Church Rock uranium mill tailings disposal pond breached its dam. Over 1,000 tons of radioactive mill waste and millions of gallons of mine effluent flowed into the Puerco River. Local residents used river water for irrigation and livestock and were not immediately aware of the toxic danger. In terms of the amount of radiation released the accident was comparable in magnitude to the Three Mile Island accident of the same year and has been reported as the largest radioactive accident in U.S. History.
Church Rock uranium mill spill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Al
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-01-2011, 03:56 AM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
brenie

Firstly, you said "First we eat the rich, marinated a few herbs could be palatable." Sorry, but even if you marinate excrement in herbs, its still not palatable.Perhaps we could RENDER them, and use the tallow to make candles?
Secondly, I was not meaning in any way to be praising the 'Insurance indiustries.They are money grubbing *******s, who profit from others misery.
What I was saying is they access risk for a living; thats what they do. And if they refuse to insure something, its because of their very money grubbing nature that you CAN trust that the something is a bad idea.In the US, another thing they refuse to insure, that the Gov't then steps in to insure;
You can get flood insurance, from insurance companies, but not if you live in a flood zone. A flood zone is a geographical area where because of the geography, it is assured that periodically the area will flood.So, the insurance company says "Nope, ain't going there!" The Gov't steps in, and so people are building houses, businesses roads, etc. and every so often they get flooded, and the Govt forks out $ to re-build.
In short, yes, you CAN trust the insurance companies; when they refuse to insure something, its because its a BAD idea.Nukes are a BAD idea. Thats the point I was making.And yeah, the Insurance execs might make good candles, after their rendered; if they don't stink too much! LOL Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 04-01-2011, 06:20 PM
o541o o541o is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchdivco View Post
Firstly, you said "First we eat the rich, marinated a few herbs could be palatable." Sorry, but even if you marinate excrement in herbs, its still not palatable.Perhaps we could RENDER them, and use the tallow to make candles?...And yeah, the Insurance execs might make good candles, after their rendered; if they don't stink too much! LOL Jim
Just so you know, pigs will eat most anything. A fitting end for those "swine"

And BTW you're correct. The very fact that they won't insure a Nuke facility speaks volumes.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

Choose your voluntary subscription

For one-time donations, please use the below button.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers