Especially since Fujushima is actually a success story. Yes, the radiation levels in the plant itself and surrounding water table are high, but this isn't a full meltdown china syndrome like Chernobyl was by any means. Evacuation was orderly, and while there are some serious problems with the plant itself, it survived a 9.0 R Earthquake with primary containment intact. THAT is a testament to 1960s GE Design if there ever was one. And modern plants are much safer, we're almost at the point where a truck CAN roll up and set up a 1MW Acme Nuclear Power Station, completely safely.
then you find that even though you still have many good theoretical options, you simply can't get them to your reactor in time because there's been a freaking earthquake and tsunami and all you have at your disposal is seawater and a shitload of iodine tablets."
Which is still an option. Which is *safe*. Which is why there is no need to panic.
"Can you be sure a nuclear plant will always be operated safely? What if a bunch of incompetent. thieving, corrupt cronies are put in charge?"
With a modern sealed plant design, the absolute worst that will happen is that in 10 years it will stop generating power, because the thieving corrupt cronies have bought themselves yachts with the money they were supposed to use to refuel the reactor.
"Can we be sure we won't ever make such mistakes with nuclear power? "
Actually, we can be sure that the mistakes have already been made and taken into account.
"That we won't be fooled by vested interests deliberately misleading us with biased and cooked evaluations and "scientific" results and reports, PR campaigns, and the like?"
Actually we can be sure of that occurring and take it into account in our design phase by making the reactor sealed- as in you fill it full of graphite concrete and bury it when you're done and NOBODY ever gets radiation poisoning off it, and you also make sure that if some idiot monkeys with your design before it is built, the whole reactor simply won't work.
"What if terrorists bomb it? Or steal some radioactive waste, in order to make a dirty bomb?"
Both taken into account in a modern triple layer containment vessel.
"Which brings up the waste storage problem. How severe is that?"
Not very when you're talking a pebble bed reactor- in 1600 years or so there MIGHT be a little lead left. Until then, the fuel and waste are encased together inside the reactor- and probably for many thousands of years after that, given the modern containment designs.
"Or what if a nation such as Iran uses them to create weapons grade material? How do you like North Korea continually blackmailing us with nukes? What could we see in the future? Threats to dump nuclear waste in the ocean, unless we buy them off?"
Hard to make weapons grade material when the fuel to begin with isn't uranium or plutonium. Even harder when you simply can't get to the fuel to begin with because the reactor has been designed to NEVER be opened. If you can't get at the waste, dropping the reactor in the ocean isn't going to do any harm- and might do some good as coral grows a reef around it.
"Perhaps nuclear power is better than coal. But is that really a good reason to use it? There are so many other things that are better than coal. I very much disagree with the assertion that alternative energy is impractical."
Me too, I'm personally for wave energy and ambient distributed energy production. But the fact remains, there are places on this planet which don't get the wind, don't get the sun, don't get the waves, are several thousand miles from the nearest beach or large body of water. For such a location, nuclear is the best option.
I don't consider it an appropriate response at all. Fujushima after the quake isn't exactly The Hanford Reservation. And it's a reactor design that has been considered too unsafe to install *anywhere* since 1977. Modern nuclear power plants have even more shielding and are operating at such low temperatures that meltdowns become impossible.
Even Fujushima was due to be decommissioned in a few years.
Myself- if I was rich- I'd want one of these new reactors for a yacht I'm designing.
I had to look it up to figure out what side of the debate you were on- this is a pro-nuclear response considering the soot that a 1950s brown coal plant gives off.
Absolutely agreed. IF your idiot GPS is leading you down a road your car isn't designed to drive on (and most POS modern cars can't even handle a good sized pothole, let alone a forest road designed for logging trucks) then *turn around*, drive back to the pavement, stop, and adjust your GPS settings for MAJOR ROADS ONLY.
Took me a week to even get it usable. Part of that was that I had to convince the IT department at my new company to allow me to install Chrome, as it doesn't work in any other browser I had available to me.
I agree- so I'm going to give you a counter-example: VBA.
No forms designer at all, or worse yet, one crammed into an OLE box on an application not designed to be that flexible. But when it comes to quickly massaging data in the background of an office document, I am unaware (I'm not saying it's not there, but it's not as obvious to me) of a similar, powerful scripting language in Open Office (somebody, please respond and enlighten me, it has to be there, and I'd love another reason to dump Microsoft's monopoly).
Once again though, it regulates VB to being a one-trick pony, and worse yet, one that has been abused by script kiddies to the point that Office 2007 and above actually requires the user to verify *every load* that they want to turn on VBA macro scripting, even in Access which is the competing data UI front end to VB.
It's visual programming. It teaches something utterly different. The real brilliance of ClubCompy is the magazine- I fondly remember coding games from magazines, it's how I learned programming.
And they missed the Kickstarter deadline. Which is sad, because they offered something unique.
ad hominem aside, one should ONLY ship those natural resources that aren't available locally. 99% of just about any manufactured product you can make, IS available locally, if designed right.
Yep- same kind of idea. The power source could even be on land that way- a continuous loop cable just under the surface that we can attach floating ships to.
I've always wondered why we haven't set up continuous floating chain cargo moving. Seems that wouldn't be affected by current or storms *at all*. Would take a heck of an electric engine though.
Actually, no, I'm perfectly fine with Iran sinking our trade vessels in their waters if they're carrying counterfeit goods.
Thus putting back to work the 23% of Americans currently unemployed, all in searching cargo containers for counterfeit goods before they leave the country.
Here's a way to make sure it gets enforced: Any attempt to sell counterfeit goods in another country, shuts down trade with the offending country and gives the copyright owning country the right to sink that country's trade vessels.
It doesn't work that way. What comes out of the earth is usually heavily contaminated and it's not cost-effective to try to separate it. Separating the metals takes a lot of big stuff that you don't want to build next to a geothermal hotspot because they're seismically active. When you start pumping stuff into the ground you increase the seismic activity. In order to pump the stuff into the ground at all you'll need to add water, which is going to have to be pumped in.
I live near to (formerly right next to) The Geysers, the most geothermally active spot on the planet. There is a geothermal plant there which is perpetually over budget and under-producing power compared to expectations. The turbine blades build up with heavy metals including arsenic. When there's enough to interfere with efficiency the turbines are suspended over an open pit and pressure-washed. The water is permitted to evaporate off the pit, and when it's full enough they pour a concrete cap on the pit, build the walls higher, and start again. This is an EPA-approved plan.
Sounds like a business opportunity to me. Build a solar still, contract with a lead-acid battery company to deliver your pure arsenic to, get the geothermal company to pay you to drain the tanks, get the lead-acid battery company to pay you for the profit.
I always thought the DC Sniper was an example of the 2nd. A real engineer would have: 1. Used a modified SUV to create essentially a sharp-shooting tank. 2. Never killed more than one person per jurisdiction- making sure that fights between local authorities and the FBI screwed up the investigation. 3. Used infrared laser/night vision sight and a high powered rifle to kill people from as far a distance as possible, preferably from a wild area or park firing into an urban area (here the SUV comes in handy as well- as it can handle the rougher roads).
Gee, I thought you had to have the skills of a fundamentalist just to SURVIVE peer review (a thick skin and NO regard for other people's opinions would sure help).
Well, see, that's the point. You didn't *need* to invest 100% of your portfolio in only one thing for the conspiracy of the financial industry that Madoff was a poster boy of to get you- you only needed to invest at all.
Slashdot Mirror
"I don't think you can really be so angry with the anti-nuclear crowd."
But I can consider them to be a bunch of idiots whose knowledge on the state of the science is stuck in 1977 with GE LWRs like Fujushima.
"As it stands today, it requires tons of extremely toxic substances to be housed inside a super-heated pressure vessel. "
That has not been true since 1977. Low pressure nuclear reactors have been available for several years now.
Especially since Fujushima is actually a success story. Yes, the radiation levels in the plant itself and surrounding water table are high, but this isn't a full meltdown china syndrome like Chernobyl was by any means. Evacuation was orderly, and while there are some serious problems with the plant itself, it survived a 9.0 R Earthquake with primary containment intact. THAT is a testament to 1960s GE Design if there ever was one. And modern plants are much safer, we're almost at the point where a truck CAN roll up and set up a 1MW Acme Nuclear Power Station, completely safely.
So when will we get the app to cure bigotry against normal human beings??
"then an earthquake will hit it.
then a tsunami will hit it.
then multiple massive aftershocks.
then you find that even though you still have many good theoretical options, you simply can't get them to your reactor in time because there's been a freaking earthquake and tsunami and all you have at your disposal is seawater and a shitload of iodine tablets."
Which is still an option. Which is *safe*. Which is why there is no need to panic.
But it's not relatively soon when you're talking about peat coal, which is a renewable resource with only a 300 year generation.
And I'd also point out that coal is renewable- land slides in Southern Oregon show a coal seam is what happens 300 years after a forest fire.
"Can you be sure a nuclear plant will always be operated safely? What if a bunch of incompetent. thieving, corrupt cronies are put in charge?"
With a modern sealed plant design, the absolute worst that will happen is that in 10 years it will stop generating power, because the thieving corrupt cronies have bought themselves yachts with the money they were supposed to use to refuel the reactor.
"Can we be sure we won't ever make such mistakes with nuclear power? "
Actually, we can be sure that the mistakes have already been made and taken into account.
"That we won't be fooled by vested interests deliberately misleading us with biased and cooked evaluations and "scientific" results and reports, PR campaigns, and the like?"
Actually we can be sure of that occurring and take it into account in our design phase by making the reactor sealed- as in you fill it full of graphite concrete and bury it when you're done and NOBODY ever gets radiation poisoning off it, and you also make sure that if some idiot monkeys with your design before it is built, the whole reactor simply won't work.
"What if terrorists bomb it? Or steal some radioactive waste, in order to make a dirty bomb?"
Both taken into account in a modern triple layer containment vessel.
"Which brings up the waste storage problem. How severe is that?"
Not very when you're talking a pebble bed reactor- in 1600 years or so there MIGHT be a little lead left. Until then, the fuel and waste are encased together inside the reactor- and probably for many thousands of years after that, given the modern containment designs.
"Or what if a nation such as Iran uses them to create weapons grade material? How do you like North Korea continually blackmailing us with nukes? What could we see in the future? Threats to dump nuclear waste in the ocean, unless we buy them off?"
Hard to make weapons grade material when the fuel to begin with isn't uranium or plutonium. Even harder when you simply can't get to the fuel to begin with because the reactor has been designed to NEVER be opened. If you can't get at the waste, dropping the reactor in the ocean isn't going to do any harm- and might do some good as coral grows a reef around it.
"Perhaps nuclear power is better than coal. But is that really a good reason to use it? There are so many other things that are better than coal. I very much disagree with the assertion that alternative energy is impractical."
Me too, I'm personally for wave energy and ambient distributed energy production. But the fact remains, there are places on this planet which don't get the wind, don't get the sun, don't get the waves, are several thousand miles from the nearest beach or large body of water. For such a location, nuclear is the best option.
I don't consider it an appropriate response at all. Fujushima after the quake isn't exactly The Hanford Reservation. And it's a reactor design that has been considered too unsafe to install *anywhere* since 1977. Modern nuclear power plants have even more shielding and are operating at such low temperatures that meltdowns become impossible.
Even Fujushima was due to be decommissioned in a few years.
Myself- if I was rich- I'd want one of these new reactors for a yacht I'm designing.
I had to look it up to figure out what side of the debate you were on- this is a pro-nuclear response considering the soot that a 1950s brown coal plant gives off.
I feel the age I am,40. I first got this as a Paper Copy called "Steal this Book"
Absolutely agreed. IF your idiot GPS is leading you down a road your car isn't designed to drive on (and most POS modern cars can't even handle a good sized pothole, let alone a forest road designed for logging trucks) then *turn around*, drive back to the pavement, stop, and adjust your GPS settings for MAJOR ROADS ONLY.
Took me a week to even get it usable. Part of that was that I had to convince the IT department at my new company to allow me to install Chrome, as it doesn't work in any other browser I had available to me.
I agree- so I'm going to give you a counter-example: VBA.
No forms designer at all, or worse yet, one crammed into an OLE box on an application not designed to be that flexible. But when it comes to quickly massaging data in the background of an office document, I am unaware (I'm not saying it's not there, but it's not as obvious to me) of a similar, powerful scripting language in Open Office (somebody, please respond and enlighten me, it has to be there, and I'd love another reason to dump Microsoft's monopoly).
Once again though, it regulates VB to being a one-trick pony, and worse yet, one that has been abused by script kiddies to the point that Office 2007 and above actually requires the user to verify *every load* that they want to turn on VBA macro scripting, even in Access which is the competing data UI front end to VB.
Kodu isn't Code.
It's visual programming. It teaches something utterly different. The real brilliance of ClubCompy is the magazine- I fondly remember coding games from magazines, it's how I learned programming.
And they missed the Kickstarter deadline. Which is sad, because they offered something unique.
ad hominem aside, one should ONLY ship those natural resources that aren't available locally. 99% of just about any manufactured product you can make, IS available locally, if designed right.
Yep- same kind of idea. The power source could even be on land that way- a continuous loop cable just under the surface that we can attach floating ships to.
Some car ferries already work that way.
I've always wondered why we haven't set up continuous floating chain cargo moving. Seems that wouldn't be affected by current or storms *at all*. Would take a heck of an electric engine though.
I've got a MUCH more efficient solution- ship only natural resources, send the plans electronically over the Internet, and manufacture locally.
And those nutrient-devoid dead zones are dead *because* of the sulfur bearing soot.
Actually, no, I'm perfectly fine with Iran sinking our trade vessels in their waters if they're carrying counterfeit goods.
Thus putting back to work the 23% of Americans currently unemployed, all in searching cargo containers for counterfeit goods before they leave the country.
Here's a way to make sure it gets enforced:
Any attempt to sell counterfeit goods in another country, shuts down trade with the offending country and gives the copyright owning country the right to sink that country's trade vessels.
Bet that would step up enforcement in a hurry.
It doesn't work that way. What comes out of the earth is usually heavily contaminated and it's not cost-effective to try to separate it. Separating the metals takes a lot of big stuff that you don't want to build next to a geothermal hotspot because they're seismically active. When you start pumping stuff into the ground you increase the seismic activity. In order to pump the stuff into the ground at all you'll need to add water, which is going to have to be pumped in.
I live near to (formerly right next to) The Geysers, the most geothermally active spot on the planet. There is a geothermal plant there which is perpetually over budget and under-producing power compared to expectations. The turbine blades build up with heavy metals including arsenic. When there's enough to interfere with efficiency the turbines are suspended over an open pit and pressure-washed. The water is permitted to evaporate off the pit, and when it's full enough they pour a concrete cap on the pit, build the walls higher, and start again. This is an EPA-approved plan.
Sounds like a business opportunity to me. Build a solar still, contract with a lead-acid battery company to deliver your pure arsenic to, get the geothermal company to pay you to drain the tanks, get the lead-acid battery company to pay you for the profit.
Same idea as Guiness and Kraft Marmite.
I always thought the DC Sniper was an example of the 2nd. A real engineer would have:
1. Used a modified SUV to create essentially a sharp-shooting tank.
2. Never killed more than one person per jurisdiction- making sure that fights between local authorities and the FBI screwed up the investigation.
3. Used infrared laser/night vision sight and a high powered rifle to kill people from as far a distance as possible, preferably from a wild area or park firing into an urban area (here the SUV comes in handy as well- as it can handle the rougher roads).
Gee, I thought you had to have the skills of a fundamentalist just to SURVIVE peer review (a thick skin and NO regard for other people's opinions would sure help).
Well, see, that's the point. You didn't *need* to invest 100% of your portfolio in only one thing for the conspiracy of the financial industry that Madoff was a poster boy of to get you- you only needed to invest at all.