This song I'm gonna share with you It's called a letter to my penis y'all
Dear penis, I don't think I like you anymore
You used to watch me shave, now all you do is stare at the floor
Ohhhh dear penis, I don't like you anymore
Used to be you and me, a paper towel and a dirty magazine
That's all we needed to get by
Now It seems things have changed, I think that you're the one to blame
Dear penis I don't like you anymore
He sings, dear Rodney, I don't think I like you anymore
Cause when you get to drinkin', you put me places I've never been before
Dear Rodney, I don't like you anymore
Why cant we just get a grip on our man to hand relationship
Come to terms truly how we feel
If we put our heads together we could just stay home forever
Dear penis, I think I like you after all
Oh hey Rodney, while your shavin', shave my balls
First, I would like to express my gratitude to the workers and engineers attempting to get the Fukushima disaster under control.
LOL.
Plutonium.
The very fact that you use plutonium for your scaremongering signifies that you have no freaking clue about what you're talking about.
I said "There is a reason that spent fuel rods are kept in a pool with a constant supply of cool water" that is the context. The fuel rods are MOX so we agree that they contain plutonium.
Plutonium is not something that you would want to keep under your pillow, but you can google up images of people handling few kilogram-sized chunks of it with minimal protective equipnemt like facemasks and gloves.
Sure, you could swim in a spent fuel pool, you just wouldn't open your eyes. However I wouldn't hang around if the water drained out or the spent fuel pool collapsed and smashed several thousands tones of concrete and fuel rods together.
And there's about 200 kg of it total at Fukushima, as the main fuel was uranium, only a tiny amount of plutonium was mixed-in into fuel in reactor 3. That 200 kg enough to poison a small-to-modeate size lake, not cause a freaking planetary-scale extincion event.
Unless you happen to have the manifest for the fuel composition of Fukushima Unit 3 that you can share it's fair to say that you don't know what it is going into the reactor. No one has any idea what the composition of those fuel rods are when they are hot and coming out of the reactor. At issue is there is enough plutonium to start criticality and more than enough energy in the mass of remaining spent fuel for it to become critical within a supercritical radioactive fire outside of a nuclear reactor.
Plutonium's radiation is so (comparably) weak that it's not even the main concern when talking about releasing plutonium into the environment, its main hazard is that it is a heavy metal like lead or mercury, and just like them, it's toxic.
The key take-away for you here is the difference between inside and outside of the body and bio-accumulation in the food chain.
I think you're missing that Fukushima is in the presence of seawater because it's next to the ocean therfore Plutonium *Chloride* is produced which is highly soluble to metabolic processes. Your ignorance lies in that plutonium is an energetic alpha emitter which you refer to as weak because most living things are resistant to external alpha exposure. However it is an energetic alpha so when it is absorbed *into* the body that exposure is *internal* exposure and much more problematic because the layers of skin aren't wrapped around our internal organs.
Plutonium oxide is a potential inhalant and once it is breathed in it is very difficult to remove.
This is the difference between external radiation exposure and internal radiation exposure.
we're not talking about multiple-kilogram amounts, not multiple hundred tons amount. But "ZOMG few kilos of caesium got leaked we're all gonna DIE" sounds much less scary, eh?
Except we are talking about reactor cores that weigh about 160 tonnes and we have 40 years worth of spent fuel stacked up. So yeah it's many hundreds of tonnes.
Now let me go over your post to show you and everyone else how much of an idiot you are.
I note how emotional you appear and how divorced from reality this makes your rant.
Heck, we have already put of this shit right into the atmosphere through nuclear tests.
In this sentence several thousand of TONNES with roughly a one kilo warhead would translate to "several thousands" of nuclear warheads when we know there were several hundreds of nuclear tests. That's several hundred kilograms, not several thousand tonnes. Quite a discrepancy in what
I read it, twice. I wrote two forty page submissions to government about why this Bill was bad.
The bill was actually called telecommunication assistance act, and does not ban encryption, and actually has a clause preventing government from ordering any weakness insecurity for anyone other than the one individual in question.
What it does is order is a front door be constructed so that government can access everything.
The encryption laws are totally misunderstood and said wrong in media.
There is no back door or weakness.
Inherently, the bill does not define what a "systemic weakness" is whilst relying on it as a primary concept in the bill.
What the law does ask is that if the government gets a court order for a users information, the company needs to help by logging that particular users encryption key or password, next time they log in for instance.
No it does not. The Bill delegates powers through the Attorney General to the heads of various police department. Except the ones investigating government corruption - they are excluded from accessing these powers in pursuit of a politician.
It specifically criminalizes information technology professionals who do not want to have their skill set used to spy on fellow citizens through Technical Assistance Notices and other legal mechanisms to compel an innocent 3rd party to co-operate.
There is no law banning encryption.
Just by-passes it.
It actually changes nothing because judges can already order you to capture a password or encryption key for you, it just sets up a commission that makes the process faster.
10 years jail and $60,000 in fines for not co-operating hardly qualifies as no change. You need read these laws if you hope to understand why they are so bad.
From that the issue of spent fuel pool vulnerabilities warranted further study in the now declassified report Safety and Security of Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage: Public Report by the Committee on the Safety and Security of Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage within the National Research Council which details variation of the above scenario from a terrorist attack, as opposed to a disaster.
Actions to reduce the possibility of these kinds of scenarios are simple and cost effective. Mainly by dry cask storing fuel that has cooled for 5 years and separating and dispersing spent fuel recently removed from the reactor throughout the pool. All very practical, affordable actions for reducing this risk.
There is very little point arguing with people who look at Nuclear power from an idealistic viewpoint. For them Nuclear power is perfect and requires no improvements. This, according to the official report into the Fukushima accident is how it occurred.
Again I would like to express my gratitude to the workers and engineers attempting to get the Fukushima disaster under control.
Fukushima was four disasters at once and considering the amount of spent fuel rods stored on the site had the potential to be an extinction level event.
This is by far the stupidest thing I have read so far in 2019. You have another 10 months to try and top it, but I doubt that's possible.
Your comment suggests this information is so far out of your capacity to process you have to use ridicule to mask your fear, knowing that the truth is far from your capacity to comprehend. Your discomfit is evident in your inability to ask questions which exposes ignorance that Mr AC had the social skills to ask to be excused for.
It seems from the way you communicate, c6gunner, that you carry the consequences of some serious trauma. From your pseudonym you are presumably a serviceman or woman, probably some kind of infantry, who received either psychological or head trauma, perhaps both if you were exposed to explosions. At the very least you were probably bullied a lot when you were very young, which may have led you to serve. You probably blame smart people for that, so you come here to take your anger out on smart people.
Whilst I appreciate your potential service it seems that whatever trauma you carry has locked you into a very low level of cognition and has made your higher brain functions unavailable. Despite your rudeness I offer you compassion out of recognition that you are someone who has been brutally victimized, probably as a child which causes you to act like a bit of a dick (which you may know but can't understand why). For now I offer you the benefit of the doubt as a service to you so you can find out who you are underneath all of the bravado of your trauma because you still act like an abused little boy.
I would suggest that my posts may be far too traumatizing for you to absorb and that you should refrain from reading them in your fragile psychological state as they may lead you to self-harm some months after you read them when you have forgotten you have. The punishing voices inside your head that compel you to behave the way you do can be resolved as you resolve the trauma however for now engaging me in conversation on this subject may trigger them relentlessly, I suggest, for weeks to come.
As for your teenage like responses, they are a sign of your collapsed ego boundaries which is why you are so boring to interact with in a forum designed for adult conversation.
Please excuse my ignorance, but how do you figure that Fukushima had the potential to be an extinction level event?
Not had, *has*. Fukushima *has* the potential to be an extinction level event.
I know I will probably get a lot of criticism for sharing this viewpoint and I don't care, this is a serious matter relevant to us all. The Fukushima disaster is still not controlled almost 10 years later. It's not over.
Even if every gram of radioactive substance on site detonated in a sustained criticality, my understanding is we'd be left with a big crater and a hot, ugly mess that could potentially increase cancer rates by a small amount.
There is a reason that spent fuel rods are kept in a pool with a constant supply of cool water. That is because the water not only cools them, it moderates the neutrons. When the water is absent the fuel rods become supercritical, rapidly heat and ignite into a plutonium fire that burns around 3000 degrees centigrade. Water cannot put this type of fire out as it turns to hydrogen and oxygen, concrete simply melts and IIRC the only thing that puts it out is large amounts of boron - if anything can get close enough to place it. The smoke produced is plutonium oxide and plutonium chloride due to the presence of seawater. Plutonium Oxide is an inhalant and hundreds of tons would pumped into the atmosphere from a fire which will continue burning until there is no fuel left. In that volume anything that breathes it in will have it accumulate in the lungs as they die.
With the context out of the way we can move onto our present scenario. Fukushima Unit 3 spent fuel pool still contains 500+ spent fuel rods. Currently Tepco have the crane offline for repairs after removing approximately 1000 fuel rods so they are fully aware of this scenario and are working to resolve it urgently.
A consequence of attempting to stop the groundwater flow is that the ground below the reactor has become softened as the water level rose. Any further seismic activity, flooding or industrial accident that damages this building, causing it to either loose the water it contains or topple it, will create the conditions for super-criticality resulting in a plutonium fire from the remaining fuel bundles in open air. To make matters worse another spent fuel pool facility containing another 6000 spent fuel rods is close enough to be ignited by the initial 500 rods. I doubt there would be anyone alive in Japan after a few weeks to handle the situation.
Were such a thing to occur the plutonium oxide contained in the smoke would rise to the jet stream above Japan, spread rapidly to the continental United States and then onto the rest of the Northern Hemisphere. I'm sure the death rate has been modeled by the US Government as there are a lot of smart people there. If I were to guess the entire population of the Northern hemisphere would be dead in about a month, certainly within a year. The Southern Hemisphere would probably suffer the slowest death. When I say death I mean all animal and plant life above a few centimeters turning the China Syndrome reactor meltdown scenario into a parody.
Whilst I can excuse your ignorance, it is ignorance that got us into this situation in the first place. We will remain in this situation until all of the spent fuel rods have been removed from the Fukushima Unit 3 Spent Fuel pool. You need only look to science for the behavior of the plutonium and its products for the veracity of my claims. I don't know if reports from Japanese civil engineers are still available however their claims from interviews are sobering reading.
Whilst all this doom and gloom maybe hard to get your head around and likely to be met with scoffing disbelief, the reason to share it is for enough people to know and pressure government into providing more resources to resolve this issue while it can be controlled.
The good news though is this is the optimistic scenario, t
It WAS leaking radionuclides into the ocean, but I don't think that's still happening. The west coast didn't actually get much radiation from Fukushima.
It *is* leaking 400 tons of radionuclide contaminated water into the Pacific ocean everyday.
I can live with paying an extra half cent per kWh to cover cleaning up after the occasional disaster every 25 years, in exchange for using a completely carbon-neutral power source which boasts the fewest deaths per amount of power generated. Why exactly are you opposed to it?
The first is that information related to this subject is heavily censored. The information you have provided is from organizations who are restricted in what they are allowed to publish.
Money isn't the main consideration. The impact of a single disaster is. Fukushima was four disasters at once and considering the amount of spent fuel rods stored on the site had the potential to be an extinction level event. It still does as the removal process has stalled with 566 rods remaining in a precarious position in the heavily damaged Unit 3 spent fuel pool. Tepco itself acknowledges this as the most potent risk for a much more serious disaster than the original.
At this point though it is worthwhile to point out that Tepco has removed approximately 1000 spent fuel rods - which is an enormous effort that should be commended, with gratitude to the workers and engineers that continue to risk their lives to eliminate this risk.
I'm not a nuclear apologist by any means, but it's an empty argument to say Fukushima means nuclear is impossible. Nobody would build a plant remotely like this one, or situate a modern plant anywhere like there.
Consider that there is approximately 80 of these types of reactors still in operation and that their service life is 40 years which has been extended to increase the return on investment.
The next thing to consider is that it is possible to make a reactor design that isn't an improvement over older designs. Currently the best one is EPR which...
And if we do we need to build what we've learned about organizations running nuclear plants (we can't rely on them doing the right thing) into the design.
incorporates some of the improvements the NRC commissioned the Nuclear industry to uncover. They came up with 30 improvements to Nuclear reactor design. The most significant improvement was to build them underground. What was discovered is that this makes Nuclear power more costly to build, which scares off investors. So it's not impossible to make nuclear safe, it's very expensive.
I'm a huge proponent of upgrade the electric grid. This would enable renewable sources to power distant cities, but it could *coincidentally* give more flexibility in locating nuclear plants, should we decide to build more of them.
The criteria for locating nuclear facilities is specific process based on its requirements. It is a difficult process so it is surrounded by law to exclude the general population from interfering with it. It's much easier to extend the grid to somewhere it is appropriate to build a nuclear facility.
I don't believe we should have a all-eggs-in-one basket approach to our energy needs. A diverse portfolio of energy sources means we can build them where the marginal risk/environmental cost is minimal.
Indeed. We should immediately begin a program to increase the amount of solar, wind and geothermal energy that we are producing while we can draw energy from these legacy supply methods.
I'm not claiming it's a great situation, just that it's not as if the stuff is blowing around in the wind somewhere.
It is leaking radionuclides into the ocean, which is arguably worse. All of the stuff that was blowing in the wind has/is settling on the west coast of the US via the jet stream. IIUC Seattle and Vancover got the worst of it.
Apart from shotgun's excellent response to your post I'll point out that current nuclear represent around 3% of global energy. One hundred times more solar and wind is more realistic than ten times more nuclear.
Those numbers are rounding errors compared to the BILLIONS the oil and coal industry extract from the taxpayer in subsidies for proposing Nuclear power plants. Examine section 625-635 of the 2005 US Energy Policy Act and you will see that everything you have put there is covered by the subsidies given for simply breaking ground on a single reactor.
Your post explains the mechanism of why Fukushima exploded. The reactor design produces massive amounts of hydrogen that are supposed to be bled off with recombiners and other improvements to the facility, like a bigger sea wall. Technological improvements weren't even considered for Fukushima.
It doesn't matter that the batteries are heavier in an electric car because a petrol engine doesn't just include a 15kg fuel tank, it contains several hundred kilograms of engine, gearbox and diff. If you want to maintain the existing vehicle fleet, then hydrogen is a way to do that.
The video also mentions how heavy the battery is. An electric car contains one, two or four electric motors, the heavy batteries and a controller. The best thing being is that the weight of the batteries can be distributed around the bottom of the vehicle and used to tune the center of gravity of the car. As for hydrogen, what about taking the tank out of the vehicle, putting it under the ground and attaching it to fuels cells to produce current to charge an electric vehicle.
I see what you are saying though, it's a difficult change to upgrade the technological base of an entire civilization however it would appear to be what we have to do to survive as a species. I'm optimistic that we are up to the task.
Fukushima melted down because the backup batteries ran dead before the generators could be started or a replacement power line could be run. If they had a "giga-battery" in Japan like Tesla built for Australia then no one would have heard of Fukushima.
Obviously you want people to believe you feel passionate about nuclear power and that it can solve a lot of problems. Nuclear power was established when people were more interested in science and technology. Much fewer people are interested in those careers now. An expanded nuclear power industry will require a lot more competent people to do a boring job. You're saying they aren't available now.
Essentially what you are saying is "Fukushima melted down because there weren't enough competent people to run it". That despite being in one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world, running the most technologically advanced power system in the country, with people dedicated to educating themselves and plenty of time to understand the facility, none of the things that could have prevented a nuclear meltdown were done. A demonstrated lack of foresight.
There is a lack of foresight in thinking that cheap storage will clear a path for wind and solar. That is required, I have no doubt, but insufficient. These technologies could just as easily be what is needed to clear a path for nuclear, "clean coal", or something else.
Could be, but aren't. Nuclear and coal are completely different technologies from solar and wind.
I'll emphasize the benefits to traditional power. Those power storage technologies would work well in allowing cheap and efficient coal power to match changing demand, just as they do now for the changing supply of wind and solar.
It would seem you are unable to explain how clearly.
I've got bad news, coal and nuclear are inadequate power sources because of the carbon or radio-isotope externalities they produce. We can't continue to rely on them because they are a threat to our species due to carbon held heat or radio-isotopes ruining our genome. Coal threatens the planet, nuclear threatens our species DNA, all species DNA come to think of it.
However we can gradually phase them out with a steady increase in Solar PV, Solar Thermal, Wind, Geothermal. The good thing about this is it means a massive jobs growth all around the world as we build a 21st century infrastructure based on all the lessons we learned from those two energy industries.
In the US alone there is terawatts of wind power available even before looking to solar PV or solar thermal. Even better news is that solar thermal is the ideal technology for baseload power. We've got a great future with these technologies. Whilst the transition won't be painless the knowledge that we are looking after future generations whilst taking responsibility for the mess previous generations have left us will mean our existence at this point in time has had a positive effect on those who come after us.
The one I really liked was Rebus (now on Hulu). Also Shetland.
I mean don't go there because you'll get murdered. So many murders in Midsomer.
I don't know why Scottish accents make me so unbelievably happy. Even after so many viewings, I can watch Trainspotting and be entranced without even noticing the plot.
My God, am I the only actual nerd left here??? The only one who has gone through pretty much every iteration and node of Bandersnatch????
Nope. I didn't go so far as to record the modem sound from the final sequence and get a q code. I thought it was cool though.
Netflix DOES need to record and store your choices, because they affect nodes in the story sometimes EVERY AFTER YOU RESTART.
They probably also missed that the choices aren't recoverable after you delete them. Also I noticed that when you go back and don't make choices it plays out like a movie.
That to me was the most fun and brilliant aspect, the effect choices could have even going back to earlier choices (and a meta reference if you know the story).
I liked the touch where he got on the train, aware.
Seriously, Bandersnatch is awesome, and this guy is an ass. Screw him and everyone else that hates fun.
I think he's an ass because he gave NF the idea. Now I'm certain there is some unimaginative dick that is going to find a way to commoditize the data and...well let's not discuss the how.
But the best of all police procedurals are the Scottish or Northwest British police procedurals, because you get the great accents
Don't go near Midsomer
"Ah, he's deed, Angus. It looks like whichever coont kilt him was in the hoose."
eeyee, Muhrduur moost foowl!
Bandersnatch did catch the lameness of that one part of the CYOAs you would find yourself returning to each time you tried a different path. Finding the easter egg was a hilarious way to end all the sequences.
>This incident is a good time to consider that issue though, especially as I was thinking about moving to Protonmail...
I use both. I haven't checked my VFEmail account yet however I'd have no hesitation going back to them. I found their service to well put together, I paid for an account mainly because it wasn't scanning every email to serve me ads.
I've found Protonmail to be excellent, straightforward UI which is clean and intuitive. Nothing to complain about either of these services.
I think though if you are not backing up stuff from your email accounts you are missing the point of using these services. If you are relying on some entity that can shutdown access at any time then you shouldn't be too annoyed if you can't access your data. Your data is your responsibility after all.
Slashdot Mirror
This song I'm gonna share with you It's called a letter to my penis y'all
Dear penis, I don't think I like you anymore
You used to watch me shave, now all you do is stare at the floor
Ohhhh dear penis, I don't like you anymore
Used to be you and me, a paper towel and a dirty magazine
That's all we needed to get by
Now It seems things have changed, I think that you're the one to blame
Dear penis I don't like you anymore
He sings, dear Rodney, I don't think I like you anymore
Cause when you get to drinkin', you put me places I've never been before
Dear Rodney, I don't like you anymore
Why cant we just get a grip on our man to hand relationship
Come to terms truly how we feel
If we put our heads together we could just stay home forever
Dear penis, I think I like you after all
Oh hey Rodney, while your shavin', shave my balls
Not to mention nuclear.
It would seem there is an abundance of solar energy that can be utilised.
I said "There is a reason that spent fuel rods are kept in a pool with a constant supply of cool water" that is the context. The fuel rods are MOX so we agree that they contain plutonium.
Sure, you could swim in a spent fuel pool, you just wouldn't open your eyes. However I wouldn't hang around if the water drained out or the spent fuel pool collapsed and smashed several thousands tones of concrete and fuel rods together.
Unless you happen to have the manifest for the fuel composition of Fukushima Unit 3 that you can share it's fair to say that you don't know what it is going into the reactor. No one has any idea what the composition of those fuel rods are when they are hot and coming out of the reactor. At issue is there is enough plutonium to start criticality and more than enough energy in the mass of remaining spent fuel for it to become critical within a supercritical radioactive fire outside of a nuclear reactor.
The key take-away for you here is the difference between inside and outside of the body and bio-accumulation in the food chain.
I think you're missing that Fukushima is in the presence of seawater because it's next to the ocean therfore Plutonium *Chloride* is produced which is highly soluble to metabolic processes. Your ignorance lies in that plutonium is an energetic alpha emitter which you refer to as weak because most living things are resistant to external alpha exposure. However it is an energetic alpha so when it is absorbed *into* the body that exposure is *internal* exposure and much more problematic because the layers of skin aren't wrapped around our internal organs.
Plutonium oxide is a potential inhalant and once it is breathed in it is very difficult to remove.
This is the difference between external radiation exposure and internal radiation exposure.
Except we are talking about reactor cores that weigh about 160 tonnes and we have 40 years worth of spent fuel stacked up. So yeah it's many hundreds of tonnes.
I note how emotional you appear and how divorced from reality this makes your rant.
In this sentence several thousand of TONNES with roughly a one kilo warhead would translate to "several thousands" of nuclear warheads when we know there were several hundreds of nuclear tests. That's several hundred kilograms, not several thousand tonnes. Quite a discrepancy in what
It has all the signs of being a honeypot. Be informed and beware.
Thanks. Any suggestions?
The truth is, no one reads the bills anymore.
I read it, twice. I wrote two forty page submissions to government about why this Bill was bad. The bill was actually called telecommunication assistance act, and does not ban encryption, and actually has a clause preventing government from ordering any weakness insecurity for anyone other than the one individual in question.
What it does is order is a front door be constructed so that government can access everything.
The encryption laws are totally misunderstood and said wrong in media.
There is no back door or weakness.
Inherently, the bill does not define what a "systemic weakness" is whilst relying on it as a primary concept in the bill.
What the law does ask is that if the government gets a court order for a users information, the company needs to help by logging that particular users encryption key or password, next time they log in for instance.
No it does not. The Bill delegates powers through the Attorney General to the heads of various police department. Except the ones investigating government corruption - they are excluded from accessing these powers in pursuit of a politician.
It specifically criminalizes information technology professionals who do not want to have their skill set used to spy on fellow citizens through Technical Assistance Notices and other legal mechanisms to compel an innocent 3rd party to co-operate.
There is no law banning encryption.
Just by-passes it.
It actually changes nothing because judges can already order you to capture a password or encryption key for you, it just sets up a commission that makes the process faster.
10 years jail and $60,000 in fines for not co-operating hardly qualifies as no change. You need read these laws if you hope to understand why they are so bad.
A report called Nuclear Power Plant Security and Vulnerabilities explored vulnerabilities at nuclear power plants.
From that the issue of spent fuel pool vulnerabilities warranted further study in the now declassified report Safety and Security of Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage: Public Report by the Committee on the Safety and Security of Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage within the National Research Council which details variation of the above scenario from a terrorist attack, as opposed to a disaster.
You can find information about plutonium oxidization Evaluation of source-term data for plutonium aerosolization which starts at around 500 centigrade.
Actions to reduce the possibility of these kinds of scenarios are simple and cost effective. Mainly by dry cask storing fuel that has cooled for 5 years and separating and dispersing spent fuel recently removed from the reactor throughout the pool. All very practical, affordable actions for reducing this risk.
Information about the fuel removal process and the damage to the Unit 3 spent fuel pool in Tepco's Fukushima spent fuel removal plan.
There is very little point arguing with people who look at Nuclear power from an idealistic viewpoint. For them Nuclear power is perfect and requires no improvements. This, according to the official report into the Fukushima accident is how it occurred.
Again I would like to express my gratitude to the workers and engineers attempting to get the Fukushima disaster under control.
when it hurts.
and love sit ups, crunches, push-up, standing squats, star jumps and skipping.
Looks like they are looking for an excuse to use their new powers passed as the last parliamentary business for 2018.
I don't think a timely response is as important as one you have considered. Once it is out there, its gone and you can't take it back.
With email there is some time to respond, not immediately unless it really has to be that way.
When people see thought in the response it's a good sign you've considered what they had to say.
Fukushima was four disasters at once and considering the amount of spent fuel rods stored on the site had the potential to be an extinction level event.
This is by far the stupidest thing I have read so far in 2019. You have another 10 months to try and top it, but I doubt that's possible.
Your comment suggests this information is so far out of your capacity to process you have to use ridicule to mask your fear, knowing that the truth is far from your capacity to comprehend. Your discomfit is evident in your inability to ask questions which exposes ignorance that Mr AC had the social skills to ask to be excused for.
It seems from the way you communicate, c6gunner, that you carry the consequences of some serious trauma. From your pseudonym you are presumably a serviceman or woman, probably some kind of infantry, who received either psychological or head trauma, perhaps both if you were exposed to explosions. At the very least you were probably bullied a lot when you were very young, which may have led you to serve. You probably blame smart people for that, so you come here to take your anger out on smart people.
Whilst I appreciate your potential service it seems that whatever trauma you carry has locked you into a very low level of cognition and has made your higher brain functions unavailable. Despite your rudeness I offer you compassion out of recognition that you are someone who has been brutally victimized, probably as a child which causes you to act like a bit of a dick (which you may know but can't understand why). For now I offer you the benefit of the doubt as a service to you so you can find out who you are underneath all of the bravado of your trauma because you still act like an abused little boy.
I would suggest that my posts may be far too traumatizing for you to absorb and that you should refrain from reading them in your fragile psychological state as they may lead you to self-harm some months after you read them when you have forgotten you have. The punishing voices inside your head that compel you to behave the way you do can be resolved as you resolve the trauma however for now engaging me in conversation on this subject may trigger them relentlessly, I suggest, for weeks to come.
As for your teenage like responses, they are a sign of your collapsed ego boundaries which is why you are so boring to interact with in a forum designed for adult conversation.
Please excuse my ignorance, but how do you figure that Fukushima had the potential to be an extinction level event?
Not had, *has*. Fukushima *has* the potential to be an extinction level event.
I know I will probably get a lot of criticism for sharing this viewpoint and I don't care, this is a serious matter relevant to us all. The Fukushima disaster is still not controlled almost 10 years later. It's not over.
Even if every gram of radioactive substance on site detonated in a sustained criticality, my understanding is we'd be left with a big crater and a hot, ugly mess that could potentially increase cancer rates by a small amount.
There is a reason that spent fuel rods are kept in a pool with a constant supply of cool water. That is because the water not only cools them, it moderates the neutrons. When the water is absent the fuel rods become supercritical, rapidly heat and ignite into a plutonium fire that burns around 3000 degrees centigrade. Water cannot put this type of fire out as it turns to hydrogen and oxygen, concrete simply melts and IIRC the only thing that puts it out is large amounts of boron - if anything can get close enough to place it. The smoke produced is plutonium oxide and plutonium chloride due to the presence of seawater. Plutonium Oxide is an inhalant and hundreds of tons would pumped into the atmosphere from a fire which will continue burning until there is no fuel left. In that volume anything that breathes it in will have it accumulate in the lungs as they die.
With the context out of the way we can move onto our present scenario. Fukushima Unit 3 spent fuel pool still contains 500+ spent fuel rods. Currently Tepco have the crane offline for repairs after removing approximately 1000 fuel rods so they are fully aware of this scenario and are working to resolve it urgently.
A consequence of attempting to stop the groundwater flow is that the ground below the reactor has become softened as the water level rose. Any further seismic activity, flooding or industrial accident that damages this building, causing it to either loose the water it contains or topple it, will create the conditions for super-criticality resulting in a plutonium fire from the remaining fuel bundles in open air. To make matters worse another spent fuel pool facility containing another 6000 spent fuel rods is close enough to be ignited by the initial 500 rods. I doubt there would be anyone alive in Japan after a few weeks to handle the situation.
Were such a thing to occur the plutonium oxide contained in the smoke would rise to the jet stream above Japan, spread rapidly to the continental United States and then onto the rest of the Northern Hemisphere. I'm sure the death rate has been modeled by the US Government as there are a lot of smart people there. If I were to guess the entire population of the Northern hemisphere would be dead in about a month, certainly within a year. The Southern Hemisphere would probably suffer the slowest death. When I say death I mean all animal and plant life above a few centimeters turning the China Syndrome reactor meltdown scenario into a parody.
Whilst I can excuse your ignorance, it is ignorance that got us into this situation in the first place. We will remain in this situation until all of the spent fuel rods have been removed from the Fukushima Unit 3 Spent Fuel pool. You need only look to science for the behavior of the plutonium and its products for the veracity of my claims. I don't know if reports from Japanese civil engineers are still available however their claims from interviews are sobering reading.
Whilst all this doom and gloom maybe hard to get your head around and likely to be met with scoffing disbelief, the reason to share it is for enough people to know and pressure government into providing more resources to resolve this issue while it can be controlled.
The good news though is this is the optimistic scenario, t
It WAS leaking radionuclides into the ocean, but I don't think that's still happening. The west coast didn't actually get much radiation from Fukushima.
It *is* leaking 400 tons of radionuclide contaminated water into the Pacific ocean everyday.
I can live with paying an extra half cent per kWh to cover cleaning up after the occasional disaster every 25 years, in exchange for using a completely carbon-neutral power source which boasts the fewest deaths per amount of power generated. Why exactly are you opposed to it?
The first is that information related to this subject is heavily censored. The information you have provided is from organizations who are restricted in what they are allowed to publish.
Money isn't the main consideration. The impact of a single disaster is. Fukushima was four disasters at once and considering the amount of spent fuel rods stored on the site had the potential to be an extinction level event. It still does as the removal process has stalled with 566 rods remaining in a precarious position in the heavily damaged Unit 3 spent fuel pool. Tepco itself acknowledges this as the most potent risk for a much more serious disaster than the original.
At this point though it is worthwhile to point out that Tepco has removed approximately 1000 spent fuel rods - which is an enormous effort that should be commended, with gratitude to the workers and engineers that continue to risk their lives to eliminate this risk.
I'm not a nuclear apologist by any means, but it's an empty argument to say Fukushima means nuclear is impossible. Nobody would build a plant remotely like this one, or situate a modern plant anywhere like there.
Consider that there is approximately 80 of these types of reactors still in operation and that their service life is 40 years which has been extended to increase the return on investment.
The next thing to consider is that it is possible to make a reactor design that isn't an improvement over older designs. Currently the best one is EPR which...
And if we do we need to build what we've learned about organizations running nuclear plants (we can't rely on them doing the right thing) into the design.
incorporates some of the improvements the NRC commissioned the Nuclear industry to uncover. They came up with 30 improvements to Nuclear reactor design. The most significant improvement was to build them underground. What was discovered is that this makes Nuclear power more costly to build, which scares off investors. So it's not impossible to make nuclear safe, it's very expensive.
I'm a huge proponent of upgrade the electric grid. This would enable renewable sources to power distant cities, but it could *coincidentally* give more flexibility in locating nuclear plants, should we decide to build more of them.
The criteria for locating nuclear facilities is specific process based on its requirements. It is a difficult process so it is surrounded by law to exclude the general population from interfering with it. It's much easier to extend the grid to somewhere it is appropriate to build a nuclear facility.
I don't believe we should have a all-eggs-in-one basket approach to our energy needs. A diverse portfolio of energy sources means we can build them where the marginal risk/environmental cost is minimal.
Indeed. We should immediately begin a program to increase the amount of solar, wind and geothermal energy that we are producing while we can draw energy from these legacy supply methods.
I'm not claiming it's a great situation, just that it's not as if the stuff is blowing around in the wind somewhere.
It is leaking radionuclides into the ocean, which is arguably worse. All of the stuff that was blowing in the wind has/is settling on the west coast of the US via the jet stream. IIUC Seattle and Vancover got the worst of it.
Apart from shotgun's excellent response to your post I'll point out that current nuclear represent around 3% of global energy. One hundred times more solar and wind is more realistic than ten times more nuclear.
Those numbers are rounding errors compared to the BILLIONS the oil and coal industry extract from the taxpayer in subsidies for proposing Nuclear power plants. Examine section 625-635 of the 2005 US Energy Policy Act and you will see that everything you have put there is covered by the subsidies given for simply breaking ground on a single reactor.
you are not aware of the fact that none of the energy sources you mention are dispatchable ...
you probably don't know what that is.
Solar thermal is. Coal and Nuclear are not.
See my post above.
Here's the link I was too stupid to include.
DERP!
https://youtu.be/3K43XC9J82Q
Your post explains the mechanism of why Fukushima exploded. The reactor design produces massive amounts of hydrogen that are supposed to be bled off with recombiners and other improvements to the facility, like a bigger sea wall. Technological improvements weren't even considered for Fukushima.
It doesn't matter that the batteries are heavier in an electric car because a petrol engine doesn't just include a 15kg fuel tank, it contains several hundred kilograms of engine, gearbox and diff. If you want to maintain the existing vehicle fleet, then hydrogen is a way to do that.
The video also mentions how heavy the battery is. An electric car contains one, two or four electric motors, the heavy batteries and a controller. The best thing being is that the weight of the batteries can be distributed around the bottom of the vehicle and used to tune the center of gravity of the car. As for hydrogen, what about taking the tank out of the vehicle, putting it under the ground and attaching it to fuels cells to produce current to charge an electric vehicle.
I see what you are saying though, it's a difficult change to upgrade the technological base of an entire civilization however it would appear to be what we have to do to survive as a species. I'm optimistic that we are up to the task.
Fukushima melted down because the backup batteries ran dead before the generators could be started or a replacement power line could be run. If they had a "giga-battery" in Japan like Tesla built for Australia then no one would have heard of Fukushima.
Obviously you want people to believe you feel passionate about nuclear power and that it can solve a lot of problems. Nuclear power was established when people were more interested in science and technology. Much fewer people are interested in those careers now. An expanded nuclear power industry will require a lot more competent people to do a boring job. You're saying they aren't available now.
Essentially what you are saying is "Fukushima melted down because there weren't enough competent people to run it". That despite being in one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world, running the most technologically advanced power system in the country, with people dedicated to educating themselves and plenty of time to understand the facility, none of the things that could have prevented a nuclear meltdown were done. A demonstrated lack of foresight.
There is a lack of foresight in thinking that cheap storage will clear a path for wind and solar. That is required, I have no doubt, but insufficient. These technologies could just as easily be what is needed to clear a path for nuclear, "clean coal", or something else.
Could be, but aren't. Nuclear and coal are completely different technologies from solar and wind.
I'll emphasize the benefits to traditional power. Those power storage technologies would work well in allowing cheap and efficient coal power to match changing demand, just as they do now for the changing supply of wind and solar.
It would seem you are unable to explain how clearly.
I've got bad news, coal and nuclear are inadequate power sources because of the carbon or radio-isotope externalities they produce. We can't continue to rely on them because they are a threat to our species due to carbon held heat or radio-isotopes ruining our genome. Coal threatens the planet, nuclear threatens our species DNA, all species DNA come to think of it.
However we can gradually phase them out with a steady increase in Solar PV, Solar Thermal, Wind, Geothermal. The good thing about this is it means a massive jobs growth all around the world as we build a 21st century infrastructure based on all the lessons we learned from those two energy industries.
In the US alone there is terawatts of wind power available even before looking to solar PV or solar thermal. Even better news is that solar thermal is the ideal technology for baseload power. We've got a great future with these technologies. Whilst the transition won't be painless the knowledge that we are looking after future generations whilst taking responsibility for the mess previous generations have left us will mean our existence at this point in time has had a positive effect on those who come after us.
The one I really liked was Rebus (now on Hulu). Also Shetland.
I mean don't go there because you'll get murdered. So many murders in Midsomer.
I don't know why Scottish accents make me so unbelievably happy. Even after so many viewings, I can watch Trainspotting and be entranced without even noticing the plot.
Billy Connolly has a reasonable explanation and Robin Williams sums it up well.
My God, am I the only actual nerd left here??? The only one who has gone through pretty much every iteration and node of Bandersnatch????
Nope. I didn't go so far as to record the modem sound from the final sequence and get a q code. I thought it was cool though.
Netflix DOES need to record and store your choices, because they affect nodes in the story sometimes EVERY AFTER YOU RESTART.
They probably also missed that the choices aren't recoverable after you delete them. Also I noticed that when you go back and don't make choices it plays out like a movie.
That to me was the most fun and brilliant aspect, the effect choices could have even going back to earlier choices (and a meta reference if you know the story).
I liked the touch where he got on the train, aware.
Seriously, Bandersnatch is awesome, and this guy is an ass. Screw him and everyone else that hates fun.
I think he's an ass because he gave NF the idea. Now I'm certain there is some unimaginative dick that is going to find a way to commoditize the data and...well let's not discuss the how.
But the best of all police procedurals are the Scottish or Northwest British police procedurals, because you get the great accents
Don't go near Midsomer
"Ah, he's deed, Angus. It looks like whichever coont kilt him was in the hoose."
eeyee, Muhrduur moost foowl!
Bandersnatch did catch the lameness of that one part of the CYOAs you would find yourself returning to each time you tried a different path. Finding the easter egg was a hilarious way to end all the sequences.
>This incident is a good time to consider that issue though, especially as I was thinking about moving to Protonmail...
I use both. I haven't checked my VFEmail account yet however I'd have no hesitation going back to them. I found their service to well put together, I paid for an account mainly because it wasn't scanning every email to serve me ads.
I've found Protonmail to be excellent, straightforward UI which is clean and intuitive. Nothing to complain about either of these services.
I think though if you are not backing up stuff from your email accounts you are missing the point of using these services. If you are relying on some entity that can shutdown access at any time then you shouldn't be too annoyed if you can't access your data. Your data is your responsibility after all.