Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    9:53 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Does the earthquake in Japan change your mind about nuclear power? Back to Topics
101Speedster

Champion Author
Ventura

Posts:31,572
Points:2,841,855
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Mar 12, 2011 1:02:45 PM

Does the earthquake in Japan change your views about having nuclear power plants near your house and powering your house?

I live in California which is prone to earthquakes, as is Japan. If it can happen there, it can happen here.

Someone is going to have to convince me that the people of Japan are not in danger because of those out-of-control nuclear reactors.

At this point, I would rather stick with safer RENEWABLE types of energy like solar; wind; geothermal; plant biofuels; and hydroelectric, including that from the ocean: tidal barrage, tidal stream, and wave power.
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
ldheinz
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:22,668
Points:2,813,620
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Jun 13, 2014 9:44:55 PM

Here's a news item of interest.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:27,124
Points:1,379,640
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 7:40:04 PM

Interesting article on green energy and nuclear power....
.
.
>>>Wind and solar power, once viewed as our best hope for abundant supplies of zero-carbon energy, are distracting us from what might be the real solution: nuclear power.

The time has come for states to reconsider their mandates requiring that a share of electricity come from renewable energy sources, and instead consider a more direct and sensible policy in support of nuclear power.

Currently 30 states have renewable power standards designed to promote the use of wind and solar power, which are carbon-free, non-polluting sources of energy. Among the most ambitious, California's standard mandates that the state generate one-third of its electricity from renewables by 2020.

But the hype over wind and solar power as clean and renewable is undermined by their fatal flaw — intermittency.

Realistically, you can't produce wind and solar power when people need it. Electricity from both is only available when nature cooperates. Power production fluctuates wildly, depending on the weather.<<<
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,308
Points:327,030
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Jun 8, 2014 12:48:37 AM

Yes, antinuclear liberals are solely responsible for this problem and now they complain about the very problem they created.
The circle of life continues.
Profile Pic
101Speedster
Champion Author Ventura

Posts:31,572
Points:2,841,855
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Jun 7, 2014 12:54:49 PM

It's still not legal to recycle nuclear waste in the United States.
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,308
Points:327,030
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: May 6, 2014 10:48:32 PM

Yes the problem is nimby liberals.
Our first generation of nuclear scientists could never have forseen this much stupidity, ignorance and incompetence from the government.
Profile Pic
101Speedster
Champion Author Ventura

Posts:31,572
Points:2,841,855
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: May 6, 2014 7:13:46 PM

At least you admit there is a problem, oilpan and Idheinz.

[Edited by: 101Speedster at 5/6/2014 7:14:05 PM EST]
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,308
Points:327,030
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: May 3, 2014 11:24:18 AM

I like how the liberal obstruction of the nuclear fuel life cycle and reactor build demo life cycle has invited disaster, then they complain about the problem they created, calling for more of the same to fix the existing problem.
If that isnt insane than I dont know what is.
Profile Pic
ldheinz
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:22,668
Points:2,813,620
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: May 3, 2014 7:36:27 AM

Yes, mudtoe, the problem at Fukushima was with antiquated design reactors whose active cooling systems were disabled by the tsunami. Modern reactors would have simply shut down safely. But those can't be built for political reasons.
Profile Pic
wbacon
Champion Author Philadelphia

Posts:15,602
Points:3,441,400
Joined:Jun 2004
Message Posted: May 2, 2014 5:30:02 PM

no
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:13,225
Points:1,740,495
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: May 2, 2014 5:13:13 PM

People forget that the reactors in use today were designed half a century ago. If new reactors were actually allowed to be deployed rather than being guaranteed to rot forever in bureaucratic red tape, whose sole purpose is to keep them from being deployed, then there would be some new designs. As things stand now, nobody will design a new power plant nuclear reactor because they know they can't sell the design to anyone, because government will never allow it to be built. Thus there can be no safety improvements versus the 1960s versions. This catch-22 is by design on the part of the left.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
ldheinz
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:22,668
Points:2,813,620
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: May 2, 2014 5:05:52 PM

Physicist: There was no Fukushima nuclear disaster
Profile Pic
ldheinz
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:22,668
Points:2,813,620
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Mar 15, 2014 4:55:07 AM

I just saw an excellent movie on this topic, "Pandora's Promise". It really explodes many myths on the subject.
Profile Pic
ldheinz
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:22,668
Points:2,813,620
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2014 12:29:16 PM

Keep in mind that high level nuclear waste is only high level radioactive because it was concentrated in the first place.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,795
Points:506,725
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2014 11:21:26 AM

"Dilution to pollution is not the solution"

If it is naturally occurring, how can it be labeled as 'pollution'?
Profile Pic
streetrider
Champion Author Gary

Posts:10,239
Points:149,355
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2014 9:59:03 AM

Dilution to pollution is not the solution
Profile Pic
ldheinz
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:22,668
Points:2,813,620
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2014 9:34:23 AM

My brother-in-law works in nuclear waste disposal, and he came up with an excellent solution to disposal of high level nuclear waste. Dissolve it in something, dilute it until it reaches background radiation levels, and then dump it anywhere.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,795
Points:506,725
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2014 9:21:32 AM

"How many parts per billion is it, 101Speedster? Last time it was counting individual atoms..."

Yes, the facts always seem so much less impressive than a sensational statement like there being "radioactive water off the west coast of the United States."

"lol, at weaslespit's comment ;-)"

See, now I feel better - took 2 months off ;) lol
Profile Pic
ldheinz
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:22,668
Points:2,813,620
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Feb 10, 2014 2:59:03 PM

How many parts per billion is it, 101Speedster? Last time it was counting individual atoms...
Profile Pic
101Speedster
Champion Author Ventura

Posts:31,572
Points:2,841,855
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Feb 10, 2014 2:42:19 PM

I guess no one here has seen the news reports of radioactive water off the west coast of the United States.

BTW, Shock, when do you think Japan will be able to stop dumping their radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean 24/7, 365.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,564
Points:807,125
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 2, 2013 11:10:44 AM

There is a mountain on federal land in Colorado that is so full of uranium that it literally glows after lightning hits it.

Japan used nuclear power since they had almost no natural coal, gas or oil reserves to power their economy. Is it riskier to build nuclear power plants in an earthquake-prone area? Sure, that's why all nuclear power plants are protected from normal natural events. In hindsight, they should have had better tsunami protection. Closing all nuclear power plants is cutting your nose off to spite your face.

lol, at weaslespit's comment ;-)

[Edited by: teacher_tim at 12/2/2013 11:11:05 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,795
Points:506,725
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Dec 2, 2013 9:42:28 AM

Feels strange agreeing with shock so much - I will have to frequent this thread less often...
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,164
Points:2,641,665
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Dec 2, 2013 9:36:19 AM

"I guess we should just start dumping all of our radioactive waste into our oceans"

An irrational idea from an irrational individual...

The point that was being made speedy, is that the sky is not falling, but then, you believe the Tesla was going to be run in Nascar, so that demonstrates how ineffective you are at filtering fact from fiction....
Profile Pic
ldheinz
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:22,668
Points:2,813,620
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Dec 1, 2013 7:02:39 PM

Speedy, is everything about overreacting? What's wrong with a measured response?
Profile Pic
streetrider
Champion Author Gary

Posts:10,239
Points:149,355
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 1, 2013 6:41:45 PM

It's easier to catch fish that glow.
Profile Pic
101Speedster
Champion Author Ventura

Posts:31,572
Points:2,841,855
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Dec 1, 2013 2:14:11 PM

I guess we should just start dumping all of our radioactive waste into our oceans.
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,308
Points:327,030
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Nov 26, 2013 12:07:05 AM

"So, Speedy, should the Earth feel guilty about harming the Earth? "

Speedster acts as if radioactivity is some unnatural man made thing.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,795
Points:506,725
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Nov 25, 2013 10:50:09 AM

"So it doesn't bother you, Weasle, that radioactive water continues to pour into the ocean 24/7, 365 days a year? You have to wonder, for example, what that is doing to our seafood."

Correct, it doesn't bother me. As long as you don't eat seafood caught in the affected area, no worries mate. I never had any fears of eating seafood caught in the Gulf either...
Profile Pic
ldheinz
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:22,668
Points:2,813,620
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Nov 24, 2013 2:58:12 PM

Here's a link to support the fact that the Earth naturally adds large amounts of radioactivity into the oceans. So, Speedy, should the Earth feel guilty about harming the Earth?
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,308
Points:327,030
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Nov 24, 2013 12:39:32 PM

"So you are saying that you do not think it is hurting the ocean to be pouring radioactive water directly into the ocean from a nuclear reactor?"

Since deep sea thermal vents have poured radiation into the ocean for billions of years I don't think this will hurt anything.
Profile Pic
ldheinz
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:22,668
Points:2,813,620
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Nov 23, 2013 9:16:00 PM

Speedy, water just doesn't get significantly radioactive. It CAN'T be a problem. There's a LOT of water in the ocean. Perhaps particulates in the water might be, but they'd settle to the bottom locally. Just don't eat any local seafood and you'll be fine.

What, are you worried about Godzilla attacking Tokyo?
Profile Pic
101Speedster
Champion Author Ventura

Posts:31,572
Points:2,841,855
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Nov 23, 2013 8:35:03 PM

So you are saying that you do not think it is hurting the ocean to be pouring radioactive water directly into the ocean from a nuclear reactor?
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,308
Points:327,030
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Nov 16, 2013 5:54:20 PM

"So it doesn't bother you, Speedy, that people have radioactive countertops in their kitchens"

And its radioactive enough to set of radiation detectors at ports of entry to the united states (when granite is imported). The cesium 137 in granite is also found in radioactive fallout from nuclear weapons and nuclear reactor waste.
Profile Pic
ldheinz
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:22,668
Points:2,813,620
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Nov 15, 2013 7:00:03 AM

Water is made up of hydrogen and oxygen. The longest lived isotope of oxygen is oxygen-15, with a half life of 122 seconds. It becomes effectively non-radioactive in less than an hour. The longest lived isotope of hydrogen is tritium, with a half life of 12 years. It becomes effectively non-radioactive in a few decades. Both isotopes are found in only minute quantities in water. Tritium used to be used as a tracer in medical testing, but has been replaced by shorter lived isotopes.

Radioactive water is effectively harmless.

I once visited the storage facility at the Idaho National Laboratory for Uranium and Plutonium removed from reactors and other things. I stood 30 feet from large quantities of materials that were about as radioactive as anything gets (like reactor fuel). They were at the bottom of a large tank of water that protected me from dying.

In the International Space Station, in case of a radiation storm the astronauts and cosmonauts go to a place where they are surrounded by their water supply that protects them from dangerous cosmic rays.
Profile Pic
herbiepopnecker
Champion Author British Columbia

Posts:15,633
Points:2,940,305
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2013 10:09:39 PM

YEah it does. We shouldn't build them in earthquake zones.
Profile Pic
ldheinz
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:22,668
Points:2,813,620
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2013 8:44:26 PM

So it doesn't bother you, Speedy, that people have radioactive countertops in their kitchens, 24/7, 365 days a year? You have to wonder, for example, what that is doing to their food. (All granite is radioactive. There are degrees of radioactivity. Water is typically used to shield against radioactivity, and doesn't become very radioactive.)
Profile Pic
101Speedster
Champion Author Ventura

Posts:31,572
Points:2,841,855
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2013 8:30:25 PM

So it doesn't bother you, Weasle, that radioactive water continues to pour into the ocean 24/7, 365 days a year? You have to wonder, for example, what that is doing to our seafood.

Will they ever be able to stop that radiation from going into the ocean?
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,308
Points:327,030
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2013 2:15:09 PM

"Nuclear Power generated Electricity can replace oil generated electricty and a heat source for industrial processes."

The less than 1% of U.S. electrical power generated by oil is in places like Guam and remote Alaska. A nuclear plant is simply not feasible for these locations. The U.S. army core of engineers tried it in the 1960s and it didn't work.
Profile Pic
ldheinz
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:22,668
Points:2,813,620
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Nov 14, 2013 10:37:29 AM

Solar Companies Creating Millions Of Pounds Of Polluted Sludge, Contaminated Water

[Edited by: ldheinz at 11/14/2013 10:38:42 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,164
Points:2,641,665
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2013 4:50:28 PM

"Nuclear Power generated Electricity can replace oil generated electricty"

Very, little electricity is produced in the US using oil (1%).

But that tiny amount is still more then is produced with Solar power (.11%)....
Profile Pic
wbacon
Champion Author Philadelphia

Posts:15,602
Points:3,441,400
Joined:Jun 2004
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2013 3:54:00 PM

Nuclear Power generated Electricity can replace oil generated electricty and a heat source for industrial processes. It can replace a lot of oil imports. Do you think that OPEC is behind the opposition to Nuclear power?
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,164
Points:2,641,665
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2013 3:40:00 PM

". . . and the radiated water continues to spill into the ocean every day 24/7, 365 days a year"

And despite that Nuclear Power it still is less deadly then power created by wind, solar, and fossil fuels....

So what exactly is your point speedy?
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,795
Points:506,725
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2013 3:25:42 PM

Looks like I agree with shock on this one. Nuclear has a very long and safe track record. If it takes historic, catastrophic natural disaster to cause a 'Fukushima'... There are other things to worry about first.
Profile Pic
101Speedster
Champion Author Ventura

Posts:31,572
Points:2,841,855
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2013 1:21:51 PM

. . . and the radiated water continues to spill into the ocean every day 24/7, 365 days a year.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,164
Points:2,641,665
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Nov 6, 2013 10:05:54 AM

"Haven't you heard that we all of a sudden have all of this surplus oil, OPEC is shaking in their boots, and gasoline prices are going to start dropping any day now?"

Exactly oilpan. What does nuclear generated electricla power have to do with oil??

Sounds like Speedy is grasping at floating straws being left behind by his strawman arguments...
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,308
Points:327,030
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Nov 5, 2013 10:51:42 PM

How does electrical power displace oil use?
Profile Pic
101Speedster
Champion Author Ventura

Posts:31,572
Points:2,841,855
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Nov 5, 2013 9:50:10 PM

Haven't you heard that we all of a sudden have all of this surplus oil, OPEC is shaking in their boots, and gasoline prices are going to start dropping any day now?
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,308
Points:327,030
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Nov 4, 2013 9:00:24 PM

How does nuclear power or any other electrical power source compete with OPEC?
Profile Pic
wbacon
Champion Author Philadelphia

Posts:15,602
Points:3,441,400
Joined:Jun 2004
Message Posted: Nov 4, 2013 6:49:53 PM

nO, i'M STILL PRO NUCLEAR AS COMPETITION TO OPEC, KIND OF EXPLAINS THE OPPOSITION TO NUCLEAR POWER DOESN'T IT?
Profile Pic
oilpan4
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,308
Points:327,030
Joined:Jul 2006
Message Posted: Nov 4, 2013 5:54:19 PM

"Even the climate scientist approve of nuclear over solar and wind"

Works for me.
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,164
Points:2,641,665
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Nov 4, 2013 3:46:51 PM

Even the climate scientist approve of nuclear over solar and wind:

Experts say nuclear power needed to slow warming
Post a reply Back to Topics