Again, it's not easy spending money on something like NASA when the country is flooded by propaganda calling any government spending "socialism" during the biggest economic collapse in a lifetime. Appointing someone against that headwind, and NASA getting its various work done especially since a Republican Congress has insisted on interfering with anything Obama could take credit for (including killing Binladen), was real leadership.
It's hardly surprising that people are so apathetic whilst political parties spend their energies on seeking and maintaining political power instead of fixing the structural issues with good policy. NASA is another in a long line of victims used for political expediency.
So it's a good thing Obama will be defeating Romney in 6 months. That makes it look a lot better than if Romney and his party of Bush, Bush, Reagan (who did nothing but keep the Shuttle programme on the treadmill while pimping the Star Wars SDI boondoggle), Ford, Nixon and Eisenhower were running NASA. Those people showed leadership only in screwing the best thing America's ever done, our space programme. Obama deserves credit for keeping NASA going, even growing private industry into space the way Republicans would always lie about but never do. He will get that credit, and will do more to deserve more credit when reelected. Especially the fewer Republicans around to interfere with it.
I long thought that it no longer matters who is the president of America Inc. The political system is being interfered with by political donations and private appointments of retired government policy makers. Voting is no longer enough to create change, only direct political lobbying by the shareholders of the American Government (actually *many* governments) seems to have any hope in out influencing the paid political lobby.
Re:Had to do with his management style, not policy
on
NRC Chairman Resigns
·
· Score: 2
I htought the entire point of Yucca mountain was to store the valuable "waste" for when we decided it was OK to use it (in a breeder reactor).
Yucca was a political solution that didn't meet the original DOE specifications for appropriate geology, until the specifications were revised. Recent research has shown that the original "Defence in Depth" approach the DOE were advocating was indeed the correct one, i.e. Granite. Radio isotopes that leak out of the containment are captured by the geology. Further - a granite containment is also the ideal place for a systematic reactor like IFR (Integral means the reprocessing is done on site) which also mean the energetic return of the reactor is improved by being able to dispose of the reactor in situ. Unfortunately Yucca is Pumice.
Idaho only got Yucca because one of their representatives didn't show up, so by default the vote went against them. A much better approach is a containment facility based on good science and engineering.
If you do the sane thing and let spent nuclear fuel sit on site for a few years, it won't be "hot" any more, and can be handled like any industrial waste - toxic, sure, but nothing special. It's just that this particular waste is a strategic resource, against a future where we'd need to start stockpiling nukes at cold war levels once more.
This is the standard procedure anyway, the spent fuel is thermally hot so it has to cool for many years before containment and transport is possible.
In any case a good burner reactor program has it's foundation in an strong containment policy. For example a facility like NORAD in the Rocky mountains would be a similar construction project that could include research and commercial burner reactors, fuel, reprocessing and disposal of fissile ash could all be conducted on site. However you only get the energetic return if you can dispose of the reactor by sealing it in the mountain thus avoiding all the energy spent when decommissioning the reactor.
Based on current estimates of the U.S's pu-239 and u-238 reserves, a program like this could provide electric power for America for roughly 5000 years whilst providing approximately one third more electricity than current reactor programs provide and a powerful option for worldwide Nuclear weapons disarmament.
It speaks volumes for the common sense of the management of Kodak that they didn't advertise it's presence, and thereby cripple themselves by having to deal with idiots like you every second breath of their working day. I say "Well done Kodak!"
Oh dear, just a tad aggressive aren't you, it seems all the chemicals you were exposed to in the womb has affected your impulse control. Yes I did read the article and made a mistake after a long day, sorry I'm not letter perfect, have you never made a mistake when you were tired you fucking intolerant asshole.
My original comment *if you read them* were based on the information in the article, so, yeah, I read it. It's only when I started digging that I uncovered the level of industrial pollution that the Rochester community has be left to deal with from Kodak, not that I care - it doesn't affect me - just everyday cuntish behaviour from some mega corporation who has offset their externalities onto the community, yet again. The HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM (happy asshole?) was just another act of disdain that I commented on. But by all means defend Kodaks actions until some mega-corporation does it to your community, then you can just be a hypocrite.
People like you would make me despair for the future of the human race, if I considered cretins like you to actually inhabit the human race's gene pool. Do the rest of your species a favour and go get yourself a Darwin Award.
Wow, talk about the example of an ad-hominem attack. It must eat you up inside that people get to express freedom of speech, their opinions and observations when you are so right about everything and everyone is so wrong. It must be hard for you to contain all that senseless rage because it speaks volumes of your pointless empty life that you have to dump your aggression out on slashdot.
You should really consider a therapist of some kind.
They also took away the right for the emergency services workers to be trained and know what they were dealing with in the event of a fire or other situation potentially involving weapons grade radioisotopes.
Um, not really. I knew it was there. Just about anyone who went to college in the area knew it was there - if you were a hard science major. What they didn't do was advertise it. They got regulators to approve it & they put it in - no publicity & no big shouting matches over it.
Yeah I suppose your right, I mean after all the other industrial pollution they imposed on the local community what's a little plutonium between friends.
No one seems to get it. It's not the point that the substances were controlled, there wasn't much there or the level of harm, it's that they didn't give a rats ass what the community thought about it. They were going to do what they wanted to do and it's pretty much irrelevant what the community thinks.
Ask yourself if this is a example of good corporate citizenship when Kodak were not even prepared to respect the community by educating them and giving them a choice. Seems to say a lot to me about the relationship Kodak had with Rochester.
But you've deprived the NIMBYs from whining and shrieking. Had they known about the presence of this thing right in their back yard it would have provided meaning and purpose for their otherwise useless lives. But now, some unfeeling corporate giant has deprived them of this by removing that threat.
Whilst it's unlikely that anything would have happened Kodak went ahead and did what-ever it wanted to do regardless of any perceived or real threat to the local community for 30 years. That pretty much demonstrates disdain towards the community.
These faceless corporations, with no motivation other than profit (well, OK, its Kodak) have taken something that we hold precious away from us. Our right to bitch.
They also took away the right for the emergency services workers to be trained and know what they were dealing with in the event of a fire or other situation potentially involving weapons grade radioisotopes.
I mean seriously, haven't you found something worse to mod down
but anyone accusing Kodak of disdain for Rochester is exhibiting an utter ignorance of the histories of Rochester, Kodak, and George Eastman. I'd frankly be hard-pressed to come up with an example of a company that's done more for their community. (Recent run-into-the-ground years excepted...)
Your AC seems to disagree, seems to me to be a long line of disdain happening there. What did you do there - what was your job. Care to answer the AC's comments
Yeah, Kodak NEVER did any wrong right ? How about Rand Street ? How about the dead pets in the basements, stuff seeping up from people's basements, Kodak buying the houses on Rand Street, How about when they got caught and fined by the EPA for illegal dumpin? The high rate of ex employees dying of cancer and the childhood brain cancer clusters found with a square mile of kodak park ? Yeah they did a lot for Rochester.... They also laid off or fired 25% of their workforce at the end of every 3rd quarter like clockwork throughout the 90's to show a huge profit in the fourth quarter right in time for Christmas.... Then they would hire back temp workers to take the place of all they laid off. I know of a bunch of people that I went to school with whose parents worked 20, 25, & 30 years only to have a pinkslip one day for some b.s. reason. If your fired they dont have to pay unemployment! They ruined Rochester. The Rochester community turned a blind eye to all the pollution they did, bought only their product and were loyal an what did they do in return ? built factories in Mexico and shipped jobs out of the country! It may have been a great place when George Eastman was alive but after he died the greed came in and ruined it.
I'm just curious about what it's all about.I've learned that whenever someone says "Trust me" it's the last thing you should do, everything you have described speaks to me of a ongoing horror story and you've stepped up to defend the man. Sounds to me like the community there was just happy that Kodak has finished with them. Do you live there, in Rochester? How far away from Kodak Park?
They also took away the right for the emergency services workers to be trained and know what they were dealing with in the event of a fire or other situation potentially involving weapons grade radioisotopes.
Think so?
It's possible that emergency services knew what was on site and may even have procedures in place to deal with it. Its also possible that they didn't feel the need to involve every Joe Sixpack in the neighborhood in the details of where a couple of pounds of weapons grade fissile material was located.
FROM THE ARTICLE;
Company spokesman Christopher Veronda said he could find no record that Kodak ever made a public announcement of the facility. He also wasn’t sure whether the company had ever notified local police, fire or hazardous-materials officials.
Well, it is fitting that you chose those three examples, because they do perfectly illustrate the situation.
Ghandi and Rosa Parks (and other civil rights leaders) were not anonymous. You knew who they were. They did not hide out like cowards.
I'd be curious to your reaction if you faced 15 years jail time for protesting the rights of homeless people. Unless you can qualify your statements with the overt actions you've performed to defend democracy I don't think you've earned the right to call this guy a coward. It's fairly obvious he is not stupid.
Anonymous (and Occupy, for that matter) are far closer to the Unabomber than the first two.
Trial by jury is optional perhaps?
Nobody knows who they are, there is no face to associate with the 'movement'.
Whooosh...
They have zero public support, and are unlikely to ever gain any using the tactics they have chosen. They are in no way 'game-changers', they are simple nuisances to be dealt with.
and how would you deal with these nuisances, please feel free to express yourself honestly and in graphic detail.
Assert your rights, and those of others, using the very structure that was built and put into place to uphold those rights. Gather others together with healthy, unifying philosophies that they can all buy into and support, and which lead to upholding a structure of law and rights that a country needs to have in order to function. The current basis of the system doesn't work for you? Gather people together and patch the system - but make sure you know you and others know what you're doing, and why you're doing it.
These are all noble sentiments and I have participated and conducted such activities myself because I want to be free, not the illusion of free. History has shown, however, that these are the first people that are rounded up and disappeared when the shift in power occurs. I think the thing that people don't recognise is that anon is changing the landscape of information availability and that many of the things we know are being hidden from us can be made available. That because the vectors for this information availability exist some people are awoken to the possibility the they can be educated by this hidden knowledge and knowing is the prerequisite to the statement you have made, your call to action.
The tactics of asymmetric warfare doesn't just apply to bullets. Asymmetric *information* warfare is a new construct, what makes it novel is that it's shape is now amorphous, even if anonymous don't know it. Our entire society is controlled by information control, it's why apathy exists, because people are either too afraid or not informed enough to act. As our society begins to wake to this I suspect that more of what you propose will become probable because it becomes more possible.
Many will call their claims bluster, script kiddies etc, so what, they are doing something, it is their expression of democracy. I have no problem with *any* expression of democracy even if it is an idea that is still maturing. I hope it does and I wish them every success.
The will of the people is irrelevant when that will can be shaped through effective propaganda.
The only way to get our power back now is to fight for a free and open internet. The powers that be know this, and will continue to fight against us under the guise of "anti piracy". Do not be fooled, these people are not stupid. They are quite aware that lost sales through piracy is negligible to their bottom line. The real loss to them is the total control over the distribution channels, and thus, control over the national dialog of opinion.
Indeed, Insightful++. Few people have the actual energy to type or formulate an opinion formed in *gasp* thinking. Which means it's even less likely that these people would even write to a politician in their own language expressing their will. These quotes spring to mind that resonant over today's society;
"How fortunate for leaders that men do not think." - Adolf Hitler
"It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion." - Joseph Goebbels
"Universal education is the most corroding and disintegrating poison that liberalism has ever invented for its own destruction." - Adolf Hitler
This is the world we live in. The tools made to educate and free us are being subverted to brainwash and enslave us.
I talk of freedom, you talk of the flag
I talk of revolution, but you'd much rather brag
Well it leaves me quite erect! Great song, was very happy to see them perform it in their prime while crowd-surfing. Appropriate, hilariously sardonic, but I think the reference is lost on most of the/. audience.
look where all this talking got us baby!!!
But you've deprived the NIMBYs from whining and shrieking. Had they known about the presence of this thing right in their back yard it would have provided meaning and purpose for their otherwise useless lives. But now, some unfeeling corporate giant has deprived them of this by removing that threat.
Whilst it's unlikely that anything would have happened Kodak went ahead and did what-ever it wanted to do regardless of any perceived or real threat to the local community for 30 years. That pretty much demonstrates disdain towards the community.
These faceless corporations, with no motivation other than profit (well, OK, its Kodak) have taken something that we hold precious away from us. Our right to bitch.
They also took away the right for the emergency services workers to be trained and know what they were dealing with in the event of a fire or other situation potentially involving weapons grade radioisotopes.
Because I just happen to see the Nuclear Industry a third way that is not framed as what is commonly termed 'anti' or 'pro' Nuclear. Though I've seen the term "anti-nuclear" used as another PR mechanism to cast people with a "Nuclear Free" preference as being "anti" something. None of these approaches are suitable for my position on the Nuclear Industry.
A realistic approach to examining the Nuclear Industry is that it could be safe, but it would be considerably expensive and more than likely only run by government by management processes legislated into law.
Consider this. If the Nuclear-Free lobby got their way and all nuclear reactors are shut down then we still have the problem of dealing with and enormous amount of radioactive material. Furthermore, because of the dispersed nature of the Nuclear Industry we would be looking at an infrastructure plan measured in decades to clean it up.
If we examine the position of Nuclear Advocates, few believe there are any problems with the infrastructure of the Nuclear Industry, mining, enrichment, reactors or spent fuel containment. They marginalise the mutagenic effects of radionuclides and few make the effort to understand how they analogue micro-nutrients which is evident in the arguments about the harm of radio active effluents.
Because of this polarisation there is no discussion of infrastructure plans to address the issues. These are serious costs, that escalates each day, imposed on future generations and ultimately, not solved.
The irony in this is that pro and anti Nuclear proponents want the same thing for different reasons. That thing is long term geological storage of spent fuel and other radionuclide products in granite of the country that owns the reactors. The Nuclear Free people want that because it starts to address the real issue of spent fuel and Nuclear Waste in a controlled manner. The pro-Nuclear people want it because, whether they realise it or not, Fukushima demonstrates it's not practical to build Nuclear reactors without spent fuel containment.
human beings have demonstrated that they are incapable of managing nuclear without major radioactive accidents.
I'm anti nuclear because people are incompetent bozos and it's just a matter of time before another disaster.
You won't find any disagreement from me there except in the way the argument is framed. The Nuclear Industry has had a long history of failure supported by evidence. What is worse there has been a long history of attempting to cover up those failures until the Reactor installations can no longer tolerate the sum total of failures. So something like a Tsunami happens that exposes compound failure in the form of a serious accident like Fukushima, or operators trying to conform with crazy management demands like those that brought about Chernobyl or the fortunate accidents and confusion with what cutting edge technology was trying to tell the operators of Three Mile Island.
Ultimately though, despite the sheer wonder of Nuclear Technology is there is any point to it? Sure it's advanced but without being able to address the lack of any substantial net energy return from the Industry (which is demonstrated in peer reviewed science) without significant advances in material sciences, Nuclear power, in it's current form, is more a liability than an asset to the progression of the Human race.
No, my statements were a direct response to demonstrably false info.
Well then, I pose the questions to you.
Do you accept there is overwhelming evidence that the Nuclear Industry has problems and that the industry requires fundamental structural reforms?
As to the rest of your diatribe, you've assumed many facts about me and my intent, none of which are in evidence.
Yes I have. As to the evidence I haven't completed reviewing it. I am pleased that you offer far more reasoned discussion than a many of fanbois here, for that I complement you.
Nor do you have any idea where I stand on NP.
Then share it, what do you have to hide? I have made my position quite clear. If you have anything to evolve my reasoning than I will accept it, most of the time/. is full of fanbois full of hyperbole and ad hominem attacks. You had the opportunity to confront the NP with facts and evidence but you launched into such an attack. Under the circumstances it's quite a reasoned response to such an attack. I don't care about the NP, the same assessments of the nuclear lobby can be made as you make of the anti-nuclear lobby.
If you want to set an example of why you are different, then challenge the NP statements with facts so i can judge your post on that basis.
So, I won't bother to respond to it.
Why? Too hard, too close to the truth. Well I'll respond for you;
If the Nuclear Industry had adopted the same standards as the Aviation Industry then we would have a reactor design *radically* different from the AP-1000 that is a re-hash of SNUPPS and would include all of the NRC panel recommendations the industry made for itself.
If the Nuclear Industry was economically viable and could be operated safely without subsidies or the continued existence of the Price-Anderson act.
That if commercial Nuclear Industry operators could be trusted to run reactors at lower profit margins then events like TEPCO operating Fukushima outside the Basis Design for GEN 1 S class facilities then, maybe, we would see an example of a 'Safe' Nuclear industry.
But the fact is, we don't.
You can start from my blog. From there, I suggest a google search for my name and "nuclear".
Then, we might have something to discuss.
Well I did that. I searched on "geoff strickler nuclear" and I found your discussion of trying to assess the boil off rate of the SFP at Fukushima. I actually had that data then and I can tell you that your calculations did not take into account the *second* Basis Design issue of a GEN 1 GE reactor, that the refuelling gate pairs have to be powered, constantly. I posted that data to/. some 10 days after your discussion.
I also searched on "geoff strickler radionuclides", "geoff strickler radioisotope analogues", " geoff strickler radioisotope bio-accumulation" to gauge your understanding of the mutagenic properties of radioisotopes but found little results. I also checked out you discussion on Radiation Treatment interesting but largely useless unless you knew how or if you had ingested a radioisotope like pu-239, especially when a microgram is a fatal dose. I look forward to your follow-up article.
Additionally my analysis of you article found flaws in your reasoning surrounding plutonium ingestion. if you start with one of my posts it may give you a good start and how facts are largely ignored by/.
But before you attack me again, you might want to find out some info about who you're dealing with and where I stand on NP.
Gary, this is incredibly arrogant and does nothing to support your position. If you could you would respond with evi
You can't convince the anti-np crowd or conspiracy theorists with facts.
What mis-information, what conspiracy theory? That if you mis-manage a nuclear power plant it fails like Fukushima or Chernobyl.
They just keep on repeating the same misinformation hoping it will eventually override all the evidence.
Well the nuclear crowd is presented with overwhelming evidence that the Nuclear Industry has problems and they still can't accept it. They can't even accept that there is room for improvement. Instead all the comments from the nuclear crowd is that Fukushima is an example of why nuclear power is safe.
For the record I am neither pro or anti nuclear, just that it is an unfortunate necessity and that the industry requires fundamental structural reforms.
My observations of the pro-nuke crowd is they behave the same way a religious cult does when confronted with the facts about it's belief system. The phenomenon is called social proof and when that is combined with dogmatic skepticism it appears scientific. What it does though is promote the Industrial failures that occur in the nuclear industry.
If anyone is to blame for the demise of Nuclear Power it is the pro-nuke crowd. If the same attitude had been taken in the aviation industry then we would all be getting around the world in ships. Your statements are a prime example of how Nuclear fanbois cannot accept the facts about the Nuclear Industry even when confronted with the smouldering toxic remains of 3 commercial power reactors. The anti-nuke crowd simply don't want the nuke industry any more, the por-nuke crowd seems to think it's perfect as it is, meanwhile no-one is lobbying for any improvement. It's because of people like you that no political pressure is put on the industry to improve and that is why Japan is shutting down Nuclear Power.
You, of course, have no idea what I am talking about.
A list of some scientific studies on the effects of tritium, with references, in case there is any doubt regarding Triated water's effect on living beings.
Tritium is biologically mutagenic *because* it's a low energy emitter. This characteristic makes readily absorbed by surrounding cells. The available evidence from studies conducted journal a list of effects. From those works;
Tritium can be inhaled, ingested, or absorbed through skin. Eating food containing 3H can be even more damaging than drinking 3H bound in water. Consequently, an estimated radiation dose based only on ingestion of tritiated water may underestimate the health effects if the person has also consumed food contaminated with tritium. (Komatsu)
Studies indicate that lower doses of tritium can cause more cell death (Dobson, 1976), mutations (Ito) and chromosome damage (Hori) per dose than higher tritium doses. Tritium can impart damage which is two or more times greater per dose than either x-rays or gamma rays.
(Straume) (Dobson, 1976) There is no evidence of a threshold for damage from 3H exposure; even the smallest amount of tritium can have negative health impacts. (Dobson, 1974) Organically bound tritium (tritium bound in animal or plant tissue) can stay in the body for 10 years or more.
It's often said "of all the elements in nuclear waste tritium is one of the more harmless ones" and while it's more benign than most other radioactive effluents it's toxicity should not be under-estimated.
Tritium can cause mutations, tumors and cell death. (Rytomaa) Tritiated water is associated with significantly decreased weight of brain and genital tract organs in mice (Torok) and can cause irreversible loss of female germ cells in both mice and monkeys even at low concentrations. (Dobson, 1979) (Laskey) Tritium from tritiated water can become incorporated into DNA, the molecular basis of heredity for living organisms. DNA is especially sensitive to radiation. (Hori) A cell's exposure to tritium bound in DNA can be even more toxic than its exposure to tritium in water. (Straume)(Carr)
First, as an isotope of hydrogen (the cell's most ubiquitous element), tritium can be incorporated into essentially all portions of the living machinery; and it is not innocuous -- deaths have occurred in industry from occupational overexposure. R. Lowry Dobson, MD, PhD. (1979)
References;
Komatsu, K and Okumura, Y. Radiation Dose to Mouse Liver Cells from Ingestion of Tritiated Food or Water. Health Physics. 58. 5:625-629. 1990.
Dobson, RL. The Toxicity of Tritium. International Atomic Energy Agency symposium, Vienna: Biological Implications of Radionuclides Released from Nuclear Industries v. 1: 203. 1979.
Hori, TA and Nakai, S. Unusual Dose-Response of Chromosome Aberrations Induced in Human Lymphocytes by Very Low Dose Exposures to Tritium. Mutation Research. 50: 101-110. 1978.
Straume, T and Carsten, AL.Tritium Radiobiology and Relative Biological Effectiveness. Health Physics. 65 (6):657-672; 1993. [This special issue of Health Physics is entirely devoted to Tritium]
Laskey, JW, et al. Some Effects of Lifetime Parental Exposure to Low Levels of Tritium on the F2 Generation. Radiation Research.56:171-179. 1973.
Rytomaa, T, et al. Radiotoxicity of Tritium-Labelled Molecules. International Atomic Energy Agency symposium,Vienna: Biological Implications of Radionuclides Released from Nuclear Industries v. 1: 339. 1979.
If they want access to great tax laws, then move. What they want though is access to great talent from one community and exploit the tax laws of another community trying to attract business and employment to theirs.
Remember that when your job gets off-shored. Although I expect you'll be crying "not fair!" when your employer gets sick your shit and does exactly that...
Sick of what shit? Standing up for the rights of my community and the people that are in it. Fuck you, it's business lobbying for that failure anyway so as long as I have a voice I'll damn well use it. You maybe too meek and timid to be anything but a slave, but I'm not. Fuck you, fuck the consequences, fuck any employer who tries to take what little freedom I have left, fuck being modded down I'd rather be free than a fucking slave so fuck off A.Coward.
Slashdot Mirror
Funny how you never hear the Moon Landing Hoaxers talk about that niggling little detail.
Plus the fact that the Parkes telescope had to point the antenna dish *at *the* *moon* to pick up the fake Apollo radio transmissions from the moon.
Again, it's not easy spending money on something like NASA when the country is flooded by propaganda calling any government spending "socialism" during the biggest economic collapse in a lifetime. Appointing someone against that headwind, and NASA getting its various work done especially since a Republican Congress has insisted on interfering with anything Obama could take credit for (including killing Binladen), was real leadership.
It's hardly surprising that people are so apathetic whilst political parties spend their energies on seeking and maintaining political power instead of fixing the structural issues with good policy. NASA is another in a long line of victims used for political expediency.
So it's a good thing Obama will be defeating Romney in 6 months. That makes it look a lot better than if Romney and his party of Bush, Bush, Reagan (who did nothing but keep the Shuttle programme on the treadmill while pimping the Star Wars SDI boondoggle), Ford, Nixon and Eisenhower were running NASA. Those people showed leadership only in screwing the best thing America's ever done, our space programme. Obama deserves credit for keeping NASA going, even growing private industry into space the way Republicans would always lie about but never do. He will get that credit, and will do more to deserve more credit when reelected. Especially the fewer Republicans around to interfere with it.
I long thought that it no longer matters who is the president of America Inc. The political system is being interfered with by political donations and private appointments of retired government policy makers. Voting is no longer enough to create change, only direct political lobbying by the shareholders of the American Government (actually *many* governments) seems to have any hope in out influencing the paid political lobby.
I htought the entire point of Yucca mountain was to store the valuable "waste" for when we decided it was OK to use it (in a breeder reactor).
Yucca was a political solution that didn't meet the original DOE specifications for appropriate geology, until the specifications were revised. Recent research has shown that the original "Defence in Depth" approach the DOE were advocating was indeed the correct one, i.e. Granite. Radio isotopes that leak out of the containment are captured by the geology. Further - a granite containment is also the ideal place for a systematic reactor like IFR (Integral means the reprocessing is done on site) which also mean the energetic return of the reactor is improved by being able to dispose of the reactor in situ. Unfortunately Yucca is Pumice.
Idaho only got Yucca because one of their representatives didn't show up, so by default the vote went against them. A much better approach is a containment facility based on good science and engineering.
If you do the sane thing and let spent nuclear fuel sit on site for a few years, it won't be "hot" any more, and can be handled like any industrial waste - toxic, sure, but nothing special. It's just that this particular waste is a strategic resource, against a future where we'd need to start stockpiling nukes at cold war levels once more.
This is the standard procedure anyway, the spent fuel is thermally hot so it has to cool for many years before containment and transport is possible.
In any case a good burner reactor program has it's foundation in an strong containment policy. For example a facility like NORAD in the Rocky mountains would be a similar construction project that could include research and commercial burner reactors, fuel, reprocessing and disposal of fissile ash could all be conducted on site. However you only get the energetic return if you can dispose of the reactor by sealing it in the mountain thus avoiding all the energy spent when decommissioning the reactor.
Based on current estimates of the U.S's pu-239 and u-238 reserves, a program like this could provide electric power for America for roughly 5000 years whilst providing approximately one third more electricity than current reactor programs provide and a powerful option for worldwide Nuclear weapons disarmament.
It speaks volumes for the common sense of the management of Kodak that they didn't advertise it's presence, and thereby cripple themselves by having to deal with idiots like you every second breath of their working day. I say "Well done Kodak!"
Oh dear, just a tad aggressive aren't you, it seems all the chemicals you were exposed to in the womb has affected your impulse control. Yes I did read the article and made a mistake after a long day, sorry I'm not letter perfect, have you never made a mistake when you were tired you fucking intolerant asshole.
My original comment *if you read them* were based on the information in the article, so, yeah, I read it. It's only when I started digging that I uncovered the level of industrial pollution that the Rochester community has be left to deal with from Kodak, not that I care - it doesn't affect me - just everyday cuntish behaviour from some mega corporation who has offset their externalities onto the community, yet again. The HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM (happy asshole?) was just another act of disdain that I commented on. But by all means defend Kodaks actions until some mega-corporation does it to your community, then you can just be a hypocrite.
People like you would make me despair for the future of the human race, if I considered cretins like you to actually inhabit the human race's gene pool. Do the rest of your species a favour and go get yourself a Darwin Award.
Wow, talk about the example of an ad-hominem attack. It must eat you up inside that people get to express freedom of speech, their opinions and observations when you are so right about everything and everyone is so wrong. It must be hard for you to contain all that senseless rage because it speaks volumes of your pointless empty life that you have to dump your aggression out on slashdot.
You should really consider a therapist of some kind.
Um, not really. I knew it was there. Just about anyone who went to college in the area knew it was there - if you were a hard science major. What they didn't do was advertise it. They got regulators to approve it & they put it in - no publicity & no big shouting matches over it.
Yeah I suppose your right, I mean after all the other industrial pollution they imposed on the local community what's a little plutonium between friends.
No one seems to get it. It's not the point that the substances were controlled, there wasn't much there or the level of harm, it's that they didn't give a rats ass what the community thought about it. They were going to do what they wanted to do and it's pretty much irrelevant what the community thinks.
Ask yourself if this is a example of good corporate citizenship when Kodak were not even prepared to respect the community by educating them and giving them a choice. Seems to say a lot to me about the relationship Kodak had with Rochester.
But you've deprived the NIMBYs from whining and shrieking. Had they known about the presence of this thing right in their back yard it would have provided meaning and purpose for their otherwise useless lives. But now, some unfeeling corporate giant has deprived them of this by removing that threat.
Whilst it's unlikely that anything would have happened Kodak went ahead and did what-ever it wanted to do regardless of any perceived or real threat to the local community for 30 years. That pretty much demonstrates disdain towards the community.
These faceless corporations, with no motivation other than profit (well, OK, its Kodak) have taken something that we hold precious away from us. Our right to bitch.
They also took away the right for the emergency services workers to be trained and know what they were dealing with in the event of a fire or other situation potentially involving weapons grade radioisotopes.
I mean seriously, haven't you found something worse to mod down
but anyone accusing Kodak of disdain for Rochester is exhibiting an utter ignorance of the histories of Rochester, Kodak, and George Eastman. I'd frankly be hard-pressed to come up with an example of a company that's done more for their community. (Recent run-into-the-ground years excepted...)
Your AC seems to disagree, seems to me to be a long line of disdain happening there. What did you do there - what was your job. Care to answer the AC's comments
Yeah, Kodak NEVER did any wrong right ? How about Rand Street ? How about the dead pets in the basements, stuff seeping up from people's basements, Kodak buying the houses on Rand Street, How about when they got caught and fined by the EPA for illegal dumpin? The high rate of ex employees dying of cancer and the childhood brain cancer clusters found with a square mile of kodak park ? Yeah they did a lot for Rochester.... They also laid off or fired 25% of their workforce at the end of every 3rd quarter like clockwork throughout the 90's to show a huge profit in the fourth quarter right in time for Christmas.... Then they would hire back temp workers to take the place of all they laid off. I know of a bunch of people that I went to school with whose parents worked 20, 25, & 30 years only to have a pinkslip one day for some b.s. reason. If your fired they dont have to pay unemployment! They ruined Rochester. The Rochester community turned a blind eye to all the pollution they did, bought only their product and were loyal an what did they do in return ? built factories in Mexico and shipped jobs out of the country! It may have been a great place when George Eastman was alive but after he died the greed came in and ruined it.
I'm just curious about what it's all about.I've learned that whenever someone says "Trust me" it's the last thing you should do, everything you have described speaks to me of a ongoing horror story and you've stepped up to defend the man. Sounds to me like the community there was just happy that Kodak has finished with them. Do you live there, in Rochester? How far away from Kodak Park?
They also took away the right for the emergency services workers to be trained and know what they were dealing with in the event of a fire or other situation potentially involving weapons grade radioisotopes.
Think so?
It's possible that emergency services knew what was on site and may even have procedures in place to deal with it. Its also possible that they didn't feel the need to involve every Joe Sixpack in the neighborhood in the details of where a couple of pounds of weapons grade fissile material was located.
FROM THE ARTICLE;
Company spokesman Christopher Veronda said he could find no record that Kodak ever made a public announcement of the facility. He also wasn’t sure whether the company had ever notified local police, fire or hazardous-materials officials.
So, uh, yeah, I think so.
And you believed it? Here, I have a bridge to sell.
There is always hope that a violent man will not be violent. There is no hope for a coward.
Well, it is fitting that you chose those three examples, because they do perfectly illustrate the situation.
Ghandi and Rosa Parks (and other civil rights leaders) were not anonymous. You knew who they were. They did not hide out like cowards.
I'd be curious to your reaction if you faced 15 years jail time for protesting the rights of homeless people. Unless you can qualify your statements with the overt actions you've performed to defend democracy I don't think you've earned the right to call this guy a coward. It's fairly obvious he is not stupid.
Anonymous (and Occupy, for that matter) are far closer to the Unabomber than the first two.
Trial by jury is optional perhaps?
Nobody knows who they are, there is no face to associate with the 'movement'.
Whooosh...
They have zero public support, and are unlikely to ever gain any using the tactics they have chosen. They are in no way 'game-changers', they are simple nuisances to be dealt with.
and how would you deal with these nuisances, please feel free to express yourself honestly and in graphic detail.
Assert your rights, and those of others, using the very structure that was built and put into place to uphold those rights. Gather others together with healthy, unifying philosophies that they can all buy into and support, and which lead to upholding a structure of law and rights that a country needs to have in order to function. The current basis of the system doesn't work for you? Gather people together and patch the system - but make sure you know you and others know what you're doing, and why you're doing it.
These are all noble sentiments and I have participated and conducted such activities myself because I want to be free, not the illusion of free. History has shown, however, that these are the first people that are rounded up and disappeared when the shift in power occurs. I think the thing that people don't recognise is that anon is changing the landscape of information availability and that many of the things we know are being hidden from us can be made available. That because the vectors for this information availability exist some people are awoken to the possibility the they can be educated by this hidden knowledge and knowing is the prerequisite to the statement you have made, your call to action.
The tactics of asymmetric warfare doesn't just apply to bullets. Asymmetric *information* warfare is a new construct, what makes it novel is that it's shape is now amorphous, even if anonymous don't know it. Our entire society is controlled by information control, it's why apathy exists, because people are either too afraid or not informed enough to act. As our society begins to wake to this I suspect that more of what you propose will become probable because it becomes more possible.
Many will call their claims bluster, script kiddies etc, so what, they are doing something, it is their expression of democracy. I have no problem with *any* expression of democracy even if it is an idea that is still maturing. I hope it does and I wish them every success.
The will of the people is irrelevant when that will can be shaped through effective propaganda.
The only way to get our power back now is to fight for a free and open internet. The powers that be know this, and will continue to fight against us under the guise of "anti piracy". Do not be fooled, these people are not stupid. They are quite aware that lost sales through piracy is negligible to their bottom line. The real loss to them is the total control over the distribution channels, and thus, control over the national dialog of opinion.
Indeed, Insightful++. Few people have the actual energy to type or formulate an opinion formed in *gasp* thinking. Which means it's even less likely that these people would even write to a politician in their own language expressing their will. These quotes spring to mind that resonant over today's society;
"How fortunate for leaders that men do not think." - Adolf Hitler
"It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion." - Joseph Goebbels
"Universal education is the most corroding and disintegrating poison that liberalism has ever invented for its own destruction." - Adolf Hitler
This is the world we live in. The tools made to educate and free us are being subverted to brainwash and enslave us.
Last I checked, the major players in the global financial network have actual power. And most central/federal governments, too.
Only the people have the actual power. Financiers, governments, crackers, drug cartels, religions, etc. exist solely at the apathy of the people.
FTFY
I talk of freedom, you talk of the flag
I talk of revolution, but you'd much rather brag
Well it leaves me quite erect! /. audience.
Great song, was very happy to see them perform it in their prime while crowd-surfing. Appropriate, hilariously sardonic, but I think the reference is lost on most of the
look where all this talking got us baby!!!
But you've deprived the NIMBYs from whining and shrieking. Had they known about the presence of this thing right in their back yard it would have provided meaning and purpose for their otherwise useless lives. But now, some unfeeling corporate giant has deprived them of this by removing that threat.
Whilst it's unlikely that anything would have happened Kodak went ahead and did what-ever it wanted to do regardless of any perceived or real threat to the local community for 30 years. That pretty much demonstrates disdain towards the community.
These faceless corporations, with no motivation other than profit (well, OK, its Kodak) have taken something that we hold precious away from us. Our right to bitch.
They also took away the right for the emergency services workers to be trained and know what they were dealing with in the event of a fire or other situation potentially involving weapons grade radioisotopes.
Los Angeles used to have another experimental reactor, until it melted down, fell over, then sank into the swamp: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Susana_Field_Laboratory#Sodium_reactor_experiment
Thanks for that - MOD PARENT UP.
right on - but why are you sitting on the fence.
Because I just happen to see the Nuclear Industry a third way that is not framed as what is commonly termed 'anti' or 'pro' Nuclear. Though I've seen the term "anti-nuclear" used as another PR mechanism to cast people with a "Nuclear Free" preference as being "anti" something. None of these approaches are suitable for my position on the Nuclear Industry.
A realistic approach to examining the Nuclear Industry is that it could be safe, but it would be considerably expensive and more than likely only run by government by management processes legislated into law.
Consider this. If the Nuclear-Free lobby got their way and all nuclear reactors are shut down then we still have the problem of dealing with and enormous amount of radioactive material. Furthermore, because of the dispersed nature of the Nuclear Industry we would be looking at an infrastructure plan measured in decades to clean it up.
If we examine the position of Nuclear Advocates, few believe there are any problems with the infrastructure of the Nuclear Industry, mining, enrichment, reactors or spent fuel containment. They marginalise the mutagenic effects of radionuclides and few make the effort to understand how they analogue micro-nutrients which is evident in the arguments about the harm of radio active effluents.
Because of this polarisation there is no discussion of infrastructure plans to address the issues. These are serious costs, that escalates each day, imposed on future generations and ultimately, not solved.
The irony in this is that pro and anti Nuclear proponents want the same thing for different reasons. That thing is long term geological storage of spent fuel and other radionuclide products in granite of the country that owns the reactors. The Nuclear Free people want that because it starts to address the real issue of spent fuel and Nuclear Waste in a controlled manner. The pro-Nuclear people want it because, whether they realise it or not, Fukushima demonstrates it's not practical to build Nuclear reactors without spent fuel containment.
human beings have demonstrated that they are incapable of managing nuclear without major radioactive accidents.
I'm anti nuclear because people are incompetent bozos and it's just a matter of time before another disaster.
You won't find any disagreement from me there except in the way the argument is framed. The Nuclear Industry has had a long history of failure supported by evidence. What is worse there has been a long history of attempting to cover up those failures until the Reactor installations can no longer tolerate the sum total of failures. So something like a Tsunami happens that exposes compound failure in the form of a serious accident like Fukushima, or operators trying to conform with crazy management demands like those that brought about Chernobyl or the fortunate accidents and confusion with what cutting edge technology was trying to tell the operators of Three Mile Island.
Ultimately though, despite the sheer wonder of Nuclear Technology is there is any point to it? Sure it's advanced but without being able to address the lack of any substantial net energy return from the Industry (which is demonstrated in peer reviewed science) without significant advances in material sciences, Nuclear power, in it's current form, is more a liability than an asset to the progression of the Human race.
And don't forget to remind people that ....
it's radionuclides that are the *real* issue, not radiation.
No, my statements were a direct response to demonstrably false info.
Well then, I pose the questions to you.
Do you accept there is overwhelming evidence that the Nuclear Industry has problems and that the industry requires fundamental structural reforms?
As to the rest of your diatribe, you've assumed many facts about me and my intent, none of which are in evidence.
Yes I have. As to the evidence I haven't completed reviewing it. I am pleased that you offer far more reasoned discussion than a many of fanbois here, for that I complement you.
Nor do you have any idea where I stand on NP.
Then share it, what do you have to hide? I have made my position quite clear. If you have anything to evolve my reasoning than I will accept it, most of the time /. is full of fanbois full of hyperbole and ad hominem attacks. You had the opportunity to confront the NP with facts and evidence but you launched into such an attack. Under the circumstances it's quite a reasoned response to such an attack. I don't care about the NP, the same assessments of the nuclear lobby can be made as you make of the anti-nuclear lobby.
If you want to set an example of why you are different, then challenge the NP statements with facts so i can judge your post on that basis.
So, I won't bother to respond to it.
Why? Too hard, too close to the truth. Well I'll respond for you;
If the Nuclear Industry had adopted the same standards as the Aviation Industry then we would have a reactor design *radically* different from the AP-1000 that is a re-hash of SNUPPS and would include all of the NRC panel recommendations the industry made for itself.
If the Nuclear Industry was economically viable and could be operated safely without subsidies or the continued existence of the Price-Anderson act.
That if commercial Nuclear Industry operators could be trusted to run reactors at lower profit margins then events like TEPCO operating Fukushima outside the Basis Design for GEN 1 S class facilities then, maybe, we would see an example of a 'Safe' Nuclear industry.
But the fact is, we don't.
You can start from my blog. From there, I suggest a google search for my name and "nuclear".
Then, we might have something to discuss.
Well I did that. I searched on "geoff strickler nuclear" and I found your discussion of trying to assess the boil off rate of the SFP at Fukushima. I actually had that data then and I can tell you that your calculations did not take into account the *second* Basis Design issue of a GEN 1 GE reactor, that the refuelling gate pairs have to be powered, constantly. I posted that data to /. some 10 days after your discussion.
I also searched on "geoff strickler radionuclides", "geoff strickler radioisotope analogues", " geoff strickler radioisotope bio-accumulation" to gauge your understanding of the mutagenic properties of radioisotopes but found little results. I also checked out you discussion on Radiation Treatment interesting but largely useless unless you knew how or if you had ingested a radioisotope like pu-239, especially when a microgram is a fatal dose. I look forward to your follow-up article.
Additionally my analysis of you article found flaws in your reasoning surrounding plutonium ingestion. if you start with one of my posts it may give you a good start and how facts are largely ignored by /.
But before you attack me again, you might want to find out some info about who you're dealing with and where I stand on NP.
Gary, this is incredibly arrogant and does nothing to support your position. If you could you would respond with evi
You can't convince the anti-np crowd or conspiracy theorists with facts.
What mis-information, what conspiracy theory? That if you mis-manage a nuclear power plant it fails like Fukushima or Chernobyl.
They just keep on repeating the same misinformation hoping it will eventually override all the evidence.
Well the nuclear crowd is presented with overwhelming evidence that the Nuclear Industry has problems and they still can't accept it. They can't even accept that there is room for improvement. Instead all the comments from the nuclear crowd is that Fukushima is an example of why nuclear power is safe.
For the record I am neither pro or anti nuclear, just that it is an unfortunate necessity and that the industry requires fundamental structural reforms.
My observations of the pro-nuke crowd is they behave the same way a religious cult does when confronted with the facts about it's belief system. The phenomenon is called social proof and when that is combined with dogmatic skepticism it appears scientific. What it does though is promote the Industrial failures that occur in the nuclear industry.
If anyone is to blame for the demise of Nuclear Power it is the pro-nuke crowd. If the same attitude had been taken in the aviation industry then we would all be getting around the world in ships. Your statements are a prime example of how Nuclear fanbois cannot accept the facts about the Nuclear Industry even when confronted with the smouldering toxic remains of 3 commercial power reactors. The anti-nuke crowd simply don't want the nuke industry any more, the por-nuke crowd seems to think it's perfect as it is, meanwhile no-one is lobbying for any improvement. It's because of people like you that no political pressure is put on the industry to improve and that is why Japan is shutting down Nuclear Power.
You, of course, have no idea what I am talking about.
This is kind of like the Cuban Missile Crisis in reverse.
What's your dog food is my dog food, it's the new 3E rule
A list of some scientific studies on the effects of tritium, with references, in case there is any doubt regarding Triated water's effect on living beings.
Tritium is biologically mutagenic *because* it's a low energy emitter. This characteristic makes readily absorbed by surrounding cells. The available evidence from studies conducted journal a list of effects. From those works;
Tritium can be inhaled, ingested, or absorbed through skin. Eating food containing 3H can be even more damaging than drinking 3H bound in water. Consequently, an estimated radiation dose based only on ingestion of tritiated water may underestimate the health effects if the person has also consumed food contaminated with tritium. (Komatsu)
Studies indicate that lower doses of tritium can cause more cell death (Dobson, 1976), mutations (Ito) and chromosome damage (Hori) per dose than higher tritium doses. Tritium can impart damage which is two or more times greater per dose than either x-rays or gamma rays.
(Straume) (Dobson, 1976) There is no evidence of a threshold for damage from 3H exposure; even the smallest amount of tritium can have negative health impacts. (Dobson, 1974) Organically bound tritium (tritium bound in animal or plant tissue) can stay in the body for 10 years or more.
It's often said "of all the elements in nuclear waste tritium is one of the more harmless ones" and while it's more benign than most other radioactive effluents it's toxicity should not be under-estimated.
Tritium can cause mutations, tumors and cell death. (Rytomaa) Tritiated water is associated with significantly decreased weight of brain and genital tract organs in mice (Torok) and can cause irreversible loss of female germ cells in both mice and monkeys even at low concentrations. (Dobson, 1979) (Laskey) Tritium from tritiated water can become incorporated into DNA, the molecular basis of heredity for living organisms. DNA is especially sensitive to radiation. (Hori) A cell's exposure to tritium bound in DNA can be even more toxic than its exposure to tritium in water. (Straume)(Carr)
First, as an isotope of hydrogen (the cell's most ubiquitous element), tritium can be incorporated into essentially all portions of the living machinery; and it is not innocuous -- deaths have occurred in industry from occupational overexposure. R. Lowry Dobson, MD, PhD. (1979)
References;
Look, if it upsets you that much, post your address and we'll mail you a hankie. A nice pink one to go with your politics!
The law locks up the man or woman, Who steals the goose from off the common
But leaves the greater villain loose, Who steals the common from off the goose.
If they want access to great tax laws, then move. What they want though is access to great talent from one community and exploit the tax laws of another community trying to attract business and employment to theirs.
Remember that when your job gets off-shored. Although I expect you'll be crying "not fair!" when your employer gets sick your shit and does exactly that...
Sick of what shit? Standing up for the rights of my community and the people that are in it. Fuck you, it's business lobbying for that failure anyway so as long as I have a voice I'll damn well use it. You maybe too meek and timid to be anything but a slave, but I'm not. Fuck you, fuck the consequences, fuck any employer who tries to take what little freedom I have left, fuck being modded down I'd rather be free than a fucking slave so fuck off A.Coward.
You make me fucking sick, you spineless slime.