The US government is as stupid and corrupt as ever.
Yeah but there is a never-ending supply of hipsters who eat it up. Look at how many of them think spending trillions of dollars bailing out mortgages for McMansions was a great idea, and now they think a few billion dollars worth of road taxes are going to end suburbia and usher in the glorious high-density livable-city socialist revolution.
Radioactive materials from Chernobyl were carried by carbon smoke that was slowly combusting as it rose high into the atmosphere, heating the air around it. This is more like radioactive vapor bubbling off of damaged fuel rods that will quickly cool and plate anything nearby.
They imagined a couple of things going wrong, bolted on one layer of backups, collected the check and flew home.
I imagine it's worse than that. This thing was designed and built before the digital age. They didn't even imagine a couple of things going totally wrong. They imagined some percentage of probability of something going wrong and then increased the safety factor by some multiple of that probability and called it good. Total analog design mentality.
Is there a large scale energy technology that doesn't require some relatively scarce resource?
No, and while I think the GP post is pretty wacky to suggest otherwise, it does have a point. The point is that if such an energy technology were ever developed, it would just have the effect of growing the 'economy' (not really savings but consumption) until it again became dependent upon some limited resource and we would just be back to where we started.
So the solution really is to re-examine the economic assumptions that underlie western society. There is an assumption that we have a "free market". We don't. There is an assumption that work is good. It isn't. There is an assumption that we have an innate right to certain goods and services. We don't. There is an assumption that consumption drives the economy. It doesn't. There is an assumption that growth is good. It isn't. There is an assumption that externalities are accounted for. They aren't.
You're looking at it explode on the evening news. Safer designs are less efficient and produce more waste. Designs that produce less waste cost more and are more dangerous.
The Slashdot community is good at rational thought. And, ultimately, the only rational conclusion to come to is that you could write-off the entire area within 30 miles of the plant for all of eternity and nuclear power would *still* be the most beneficial, least polluting, safest energy source mankind has ever developed.
It's not being exaggerated to sell news. Selling news became unprofitable decades ago. It's being exaggerated to sell American coal and Middle Eastern oil and German solar panels that are ALL more dangerous and polluting and environmentally destructive than nuclear power.
Slashdot Mirror
Well you have to offer some treats to get the sheep herded into a corner before you can fleece them.
You sound like a terrorist.
The US government is as stupid and corrupt as ever.
Yeah but there is a never-ending supply of hipsters who eat it up. Look at how many of them think spending trillions of dollars bailing out mortgages for McMansions was a great idea, and now they think a few billion dollars worth of road taxes are going to end suburbia and usher in the glorious high-density livable-city socialist revolution.
Gas is already taxed quite heavily. This is just an excuse for a new tax.
Radioactive materials from Chernobyl were carried by carbon smoke that was slowly combusting as it rose high into the atmosphere, heating the air around it. This is more like radioactive vapor bubbling off of damaged fuel rods that will quickly cool and plate anything nearby.
These types of blocks are easy to work around for the determined and extremely annoying for people just trying to do their jobs.
atypical ?
Sounds Greek to me.
eluding to
alluding to
"ad" means "to" in Latin. "ex" means "from". You elude from something. You allude to it.
evade, escape, egress...
attack, admonish, advise...
They imagined a couple of things going wrong, bolted on one layer of backups, collected the check and flew home.
I imagine it's worse than that. This thing was designed and built before the digital age. They didn't even imagine a couple of things going totally wrong. They imagined some percentage of probability of something going wrong and then increased the safety factor by some multiple of that probability and called it good. Total analog design mentality.
Is there a large scale energy technology that doesn't require some relatively scarce resource?
No, and while I think the GP post is pretty wacky to suggest otherwise, it does have a point. The point is that if such an energy technology were ever developed, it would just have the effect of growing the 'economy' (not really savings but consumption) until it again became dependent upon some limited resource and we would just be back to where we started.
So the solution really is to re-examine the economic assumptions that underlie western society. There is an assumption that we have a "free market". We don't. There is an assumption that work is good. It isn't. There is an assumption that we have an innate right to certain goods and services. We don't. There is an assumption that consumption drives the economy. It doesn't. There is an assumption that growth is good. It isn't. There is an assumption that externalities are accounted for. They aren't.
You're looking at it explode on the evening news. Safer designs are less efficient and produce more waste. Designs that produce less waste cost more and are more dangerous.
Box of candles
Deep cycle battery + trickle charger + inverter
asprin, antibiotic pills
Jumper cables
duct tape
$200 in twenty dollar bills
matches and lighter
chopsticks
sunglasses
unwaxed dental floss (a good all-purpose string)
vaseline
*sigh* Do I really even have to say it?
But first you have to get there, and that's going to be a long and difficult walk from the lower end of the island after a disaster.
Followed by millions of dumbfounded dipshits.
Does having a list of all know vegetarians within 2 miles count as a food source?
They're pretty scrawny and they don't breed true but you can usually find some free-range chickens nearby.
I seem to recall it was almonds in honey providing a nearly balanced food source, though I would check that with current nutritional knowledge.
Sounds like that covers the sugar and fat food groups, but it doesn't take into account recent advancements in the necessity of the sodium group.
I'm keeping the failure option open.
Gitmo is still open so that counts right?
The Slashdot community is good at rational thought. And, ultimately, the only rational conclusion to come to is that you could write-off the entire area within 30 miles of the plant for all of eternity and nuclear power would *still* be the most beneficial, least polluting, safest energy source mankind has ever developed.
The complex cooling ponds are in trouble but are being refilled.
How are they "in trouble" without leaking? If they're leaking, how are they "being refilled"?
The hydrogen explosions occurred outside the reinforced pressure vessels, where the nuclear fuel is.
Spent fuel is (was) stored outside of containment. Now it is likely all over the fucking place.
The situation is not particularly dangerous for the public, but it is dangerous to on-site personnel.
You... finally, really did it? You maniacs!
So it is "capitalist" for the government to grant monopolies?
All property is a monopoly, recognized and often enforced by government. Copyright is just an especially dubious one.
It is capitalism run-amok. Socialism would be if they then charged a fee for the use of this gov't granted monopoly and redistributed the proceeds.
It's not being exaggerated to sell news. Selling news became unprofitable decades ago. It's being exaggerated to sell American coal and Middle Eastern oil and German solar panels that are ALL more dangerous and polluting and environmentally destructive than nuclear power.
If that's your entire plan for short-selling, then you forgot:
E) Loss!
Also, I would be interested to know how much this thing could raise the temperature of the worlds oceans by, if at all.
You're a retard.