THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 5 (merged)

[35Kas]

Those japs, ahaaha, building nukes in quake/tsunami territory, next to volcanoes. Never mind that their entire island is earthquake territory. Toquio itself atop a 3 fault junction! Just what were they thinking! Why didn't they build their nuclear plants in northern Canada and build their cities in mainland china? They must be so senseless in inhabiting such a dangerous island. Why don't they just live off all their vast fossil fuel reserves or windmills?

Also, who is the genius that thought about building nuclear plants in California on top a slip fault line? Why build cities and live in dangerous places at all? If only people had the foresight hundreds of years ago of knowing about plate tectonics, bummer.

[scas]

Those japs, ahaaha, building nukes in quake/tsunami territory, next to volcanoes. Never mind that their entire island is earthquake territory. Toquio itself atop a 3 fault junction! Just what were they thinking! Why didn't they build their nuclear plants in northern Canada and build their cities in mainland china? They must be so senseless in inhabiting such a dangerous island. Why don't they just live off all their vast fossil fuel reserves or windmills?

Good post 35k.

I only quote and reply because this is how people back up each others argument on this website - mutual agreement and expressing disdain at humanities hubris.

3, 2,1 launch! Ad hominem away!

[dohboi]

35, using the term 'jap' ever, but especially right now, is quite offensive, even in a feeble attempt at jest. (That scas seems to approve heartily of such racist jibberish moves him from the troll bin to some darker place.) Hard to know what to make of the rest of your blather. People did know about plate tectonics when they built these reactors in Japan and in California. That is one of the reasons that many reasonable people vehemently objected to these plants being built.

Humans can and have amazing civilizations, create wonderful art, explore deep ideas...without the aid of the massive quantities of energy that nukes and ff provide. What you can't have without them is a consumerist industrial society premised on the ideals of endless growth and endless greed. It is time to walk away from that society. You can join those of us doing so, or continue to rage with the delirium of delusion and denial.

[scas]

35, using the term 'jap' ever, but especially right now, is quite offensive, even in a feeble attempt at jest. (That scas seems to approve heartily of such racist jibberish moves him from the troll bin to some darker place.) Hard to know what to make of the rest of your blather.

3, 2, 1, launch! Ad hominem away!

Called that one

You are so melodramatic

[35Kas]

Learntosarcasm.gif

They built the nukes because there was no other option. Their nation was already established there. It was the whole point of the post. What would you have them do? Up all their 150mil people to live somewhere else?

This deserves a Wesley facepalm gif.

[dohboi]

Considering racism a big funny joke, and calling those who are offended by it melodramatic speaks volumes about your character. Thanks for letting us all know exactly what kind of creature we have lurking among us.

[scas]

Considering racism a big funny joke, and calling those who are offended by it melodramatic speaks volumes about your character. Thanks for letting us all know exactly what kind of creature we have lurking among us.

Ooh we get a second round of Ad homs.

Have you ever been the subject of violent racism? I have.
Please, judge me more.

[americandream]

Learntosarcasm.gif

They built the nukes because there was no other option. Their nation was already established there. It was the whole point of the post. What would you have them do? Up all their 150mil people to live somewhere else?

This deserves a Wesley facepalm gif.

The Japs sought to emulate us in every sense of the word on an unstable island and with nuclear energy. Had they instead chosen a modest modernity with less of the glamour that comes with capitalist development, I venture that their way of life may well have been degrees better.....perhaps none of the trappings of the excess we take for granted, but nevertheless gentler and sustainable. As it is, the poor souls now have a nightmare unfolding before their very eyes.

[scas]

Learntosarcasm.gif

They built the nukes because there was no other option. Their nation was already established there. It was the whole point of the post. What would you have them do? Up all their 150mil people to live somewhere else?

This deserves a Wesley facepalm gif.

The Japs sought to emulate us in every sense of the word on an unstable island and with nuclear energy. Had they instead chosen a modest modernity with less of the glamour that comes with capitalist development, I venture that their way of life may well have been degrees better.....perhaps none of the trappings of the excess we take for granted, but nevertheless gentler and sustainable. As it is, the poor souls now have a nightmare unfolding before their very eyes.

Indeed they should learn from this and so should all people. Remember how dangerous flying used to be, and how safe it is today? Engineers took the problem seriously. So should we ban the atom because of what happened, or allow engineers to produce better versions of CANDU reactors and work on 4th gen plants and portables? Climate change/peak gas means cities need new base power.How come the anti-nuke doesn't fight as hard to eliminate gas and coal plants? The level of anger/opposition is not proportional to the damage done.

[dohboi]

"How come the anti-nuke doesn't fight as hard to eliminate gas and coal plants"

Another of many statement based on sheer and utter ignorance.

I won't go into how many campaigns I an untold others in the environment movement have been in to block coal plants across the country, mostly successfully.

But you have your own precious pet prejudices about 'anti-nukers' so you just go on believing whatever you want about whomever you want. Just, do us all a favor, and please don't burden us with your obnoxious and hate-filled ignorance. Keep it to yourself or go spout it on some other forums.

[scas]

Just, do us all a favor, and please don't burden us with your obnoxious and hate-filled ignorance

It would appear that on these forums, you tend to be the obnoxious and ignorant one. And condescending. And skilled with the ad homs too.

And thank you for your time towards shutting down coal, I do appreciate it, even though climate change is still proceeding at the IPCC worst case scenario. Also, I would like reliable power for the future lab I will be working in.

James Hansen and James Lovelock believe nuclear power is an essential part in saving civilization. I am inclined to agree.

@6s. Your about-face to nuclear was mighty quick. I suspect once you discover the horror of climate change the same will happen with carbon. Nuclear disasters will kill thousands..possibly. Carbon will kill billions...definitely. And powerdown will send billions migrating from cities to your doomstead.

[dohboi]

Well, that death toll may be about to rise dramatically.

Fukushima Daichi 4's storage pool just caught fire. Radiation went from measurements in micro-sievert suddenly went to measurements in hundreds of milli-sieverts. Almost all personal are being evacuated.

And the wind just switched direction so that fall out will be blowing inland.

simply horrific.

Tokyo now starting to see rising levels of radiation:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/official-says-slightly-elevated-radiation-levels-detected-in-tokyo-no-health-threat-so-far/2011/03/15/ABdRBFW_story.html

[Sixstrings]

Remember how dangerous flying used to be, and how safe it is today? Engineers took the problem seriously. So should we ban the atom because of what happened, or allow engineers to produce better versions of CANDU reactors and work on 4th gen plants and portables?

Airplanes don't carry plutonium, Scas.

If you're in love with nuke, stop worrying anyway.. the plants aren't going to get shut down. Quite the opposite, they'll run them right until they wear out and melt down.

[dinopello]

These are tough decisions with technological, political and social components. People compare driving and flying and often make the irrational choice from a safety perspective. How does one compare coal burning with nukes ? In terms of environmental component there is the extraction issue, the pollution during use issue, the decommissionment issue, and the accident issue, each with wildly different probablities and consequences over different time scales. Comparing any expansion of energy with powerdown is even more of an apples to oranges issue. Now is when we need the best functioning government at every level. A key idea is what kind of decisions get made at what level. The decisions about powerdown are mostly made at the local level I think.

[dohboi]

Good points, dino. And remember that, despite what proponents may claim, nukes are not carbon neutral. FFs are used in mining the ore, processing and reducing the vast about of that or that needs to be mined down to the teeny amount of actual fuel that can be got from it, transporting the ore and fuel, building, maintaining and decommissioning the plant...

Another simple fact that the pro-nukers don't want you to think about is that in the real world no nuke has ever displaced any ff. We have been mining coal and extracting oil and ng at a furious rate since we first started doing so, and there is no evidence that nukes have made us do so any slower than we would have without nukes, much less left any in the ground forever that was easily available. There's no alternative universe to check this against. Nukes have given us more power to do all the (mostly) stupid and destructive things we do, but they only served to make coal and ng more available to other markets.

[Ludi]

no nuke has ever displaced any ff.

Texans are fighting to stop construction of new coal plants and have successfully stopped several. They don't have to fight new nuke plants, since none are planned and investors have been hard to find for the couple of new reactors planned for existing plants. This is in the biggest energy hog state in the country.

[dohboi]

We just successfully stopped a proposed coal plant along the MN SoDak border. The newly-elected Repub house last week just removed a long standing ban on building new nukes here, but no one wants to build one here anyway for the same reasons you mention.

If the state Dems knew their *ss from a hole in the ground, they would fry the repubs for this untimely boner. But they won't--they don't know a great political opportunity when it's handed to them with bows and bells attached.

[scas]

Some airplanes carry depleted uranium...B747 has up to 1500 lbs. But dead is dead. I'm sure the physical crash would be more detrimental to your health 6s.

Also, no matter what anti-nukes tell you, renewables also have a carbon footprint and don't appear scalable at their present technology level. Solar uses plenty of water too, just like nukes. All countries should assess what suits their needs best, be it gas/nuclear/renewables.

Some countries should endorse different technologies, others should not. Natural selection will sort out which societies survive the longest.

When society finds itself blacked out, it will rush to fire up decommissioned coal plants, and quickly build cheap new ones.

[Narz]

You did mention that powerdown was a solution. If you'd said efficiency or local production or sustainable production it would be one thing but powerdown implies people going with little to no electricity.

Feel free to provide your own definition if I'm misunderstanding.

So I guess there was no misunderstanding.

[ian807]

Nuclear power does NOT necessarily equal either human or environmental disaster.

Ironically, ant-nuke activism exacerbates the problem. New, more efficient, fail-safe plants can't be built or deployed to supplement or replace older nuke plants as long as people keep protesting and fighting any and all nuclear solutions with religious, but not reasoning fervor.

And there *are* fail safe plants. It's not that tough to do with an active system. You use the miracle of gravity to allow nuke rods to passively roll to a safe distance in the event of a power failure. You design the system to have to use power continuously to keep the rods close together using magnets, or water current or whatever. Power fails, uranium rods roll away from each other, and harm nothing. Seriously. It's possible.

Environmental disasters abound. High sulfur coal and oil look pretty bad choices, but when we get desperate for power, we'll use them. Subsea clathrates have plenty of that good old global warming disaster potential too. Again, when we get desperate, it'll be tried.

As for human disasters, turn off all electricity for a month. You'll see quite a few people starve, freeze and die. We may see that on a small scale in Japan soon. Imagine it on a wordwide scale. A non-electric world was fine when there were perhaps 500 million people scattered across the globe. At 7 billion plus, not such a great idea.

So, yes, nuclear power has it's problems, but it's one of the better choices until we can get to a decentralized power system or one that depends much more on ubiquitous small scale hydro, wind, solar and geothermal and a heck of a lot more efficiency, if that day ever comes.