The dishonesty and cynicism here shown by allegedly reputable mainstream media outlets here is astonishing.
Why? It's always been there. Media have always used publicly leased airwaves to perform mass brainwashing under the guise of "Culture", all the while forgetting that culture comes from the people being brainwashed.
He may well be a troll.
He is a troll, and that's the point. He is trolling the media, using comedy as an instrument and now the media will show their furiously fapping hypocrisy as ppd tries to get them to invoke the striesand effect on themselves. They will shrug saying 'you all know we're lying hypocrites', people will shrug and say 'oh well, at least they're not lying' and go on letting them write history, live.
After some years some media executives will fellate ppd and offer him money because his ideas are accepted as culture. Bill Hicks went through *exactly* the same thing for criticizing culture.
Trump, did the same thing, only skillfully. He utilized the media into saying his message no matter what to humiliate the democrats and as a result whole swaths of political science was created. Trump represents the epitome of the media savvy personality president which clearly shows how bad things have got because Trump and Clinton were the *best* candidates that the media savvy political apparatus could offer. Something is clearly broken.
This is the media
FTFY
On a personal note here: it's not like I really fear some totalitarianism of the left, either. But I do rather fear the consequences of proving Trump right, of validating the echo chambers of tens of millions of people who were right-leaning fence sitters until they saw the proof stack up that the mainstream media really is full of hysterical, baldfaced lie
I sense the US faces a different threat. There is no fear of a left led agenda in the US because there is no left wing politics in the US, it's painted that way to make it appear 'fair and balanced'. Politics in the US has become right wing or more right wing. The polar opposite of what the USSR was the US still suffers from corruption and faces a slide into meaningless nihilism where corporations replace the state and corporately owned prison camps assume the role of the soviet gulag.
And to cite Benjamin Franklin, who predicted this moment with words "I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other. "
I single out the media as the key vehicle for that corruption that seeks to 'de-educate' the citizens from critical thinking, and an education system that teaches people to obey and comply. If the USSR is analogous to Orwell's 1984 then the threat to US citizens is similar to Huxley's 'Brave new world' or even Collin's 'The Hunger Games'.
This is the outcome Franklin was trying to draw peoples attention to, that in time the power of domestic enemies (corrupted people - corporations in 21st C) would over power the populous using government as a vehicle. Be under no illusions, the US can suffer the same way as the USSR because the saying 'All roads lead to Rome' isn't talking about roads.
Has it always been *this* bad?
No, it's always been worse. If we all tried as hard as we can, maybe it can be better. That is why left and right wing politics are obsolete.
Your non-chalant attitude about radioactivity downplays the risks
Toxic heavy metals can be terrifying enough, thanks. "Different" doesn't matter. Severity does. And the numbers I've seen show pretty convincingly that nuclear isn't nearly as bad.
It's not a very good product. That's why Toshiba is loosing money on this business.
The suspended emergency cooling system makes the containment building a heat exchanger and a pressure vessel in case of an emergency. Not that that's a bad idea, however it's an untested design improvement. It's little wonder clients would be wary, with all the terrorism now a days.
Its primary competitor is the EPR reactor whose containment building is double walled and resistant to military attacks, so it's a much tougher product in comparison.
It's a shame that Toshiba's business is affected by this, but if it means no more AP1000s, that's probably not a thing to be too upset about, these are not the only flaws in the design and it doesn't make sense to complain about capitalism when it is working.
EPRs were planned for US deployment last time I looked at the NRCs proposed deployments so perhaps EPR deployments will take over the AP1000s proposed there. The most appealing features I see is that EPR buildings are divided into four functional trains that can assume control of functions of the other buildings, and the control room is detached from the reactor, which mean better survivability for the operators, which means they have a better chance of getting things under control when there is an emergency.
So it will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
Because that's what she wanted. She wanted performance, risk and excitement in a car and was prepared to mix it with alcohol. She was at her limit and someone else screwed up. Was the vehicle in control? No. Both parties to blame? Yes. Case closed.
That's quite a lot of off-topic blathering Shane. It shows you have a fixed ideology and a closed mindset which produces that kind of lunatic emotional outburst when an idea in your mind is replaced by the chaos of reality. I laughed a lot!
An explicit analogy, in the form of a simile, is not and never can be a strawman argument.
However you didn't provide one. You provided something about a chemical fire burning coal at 540 degrees Celsius as opposed to a radioactive fire burning plutonium 3000 degrees Celsius. Vaguely related at best because not even the 'fire' is the same and your effort to construct something resembling a strawman is hopelessly knobbled by a lack of any prescient fact regarding the subject matter. Your overly emotional reply is evidence of that.
An ad-hom is not an "attack", you pathetic whiny schoolyard twat. You fucking moron. You're just making shit up, thus confirming my original and overarching point about most vocal anti-nuke people being hysterical morons
You've made quite a fool of yourself today Shane, what makes you think I'm anti nuclear?
You are like the seventh person
Wherever you go, there you are.
I would look up and calculate the answers to these questions if I thought you were capable of registering when you are wrong. These things have fairly well understood mathematical properties, albeit with some variables like the wind and precipitation patterns. You could easily come up with reasonable back of the napkin numbers with under an hour of effort.
I'd only do that if nothing was being done. It's been done now because it was a serious threat that most people would not be able to comprehend. Look at how knowledge of it has destabilized you, you've gone off into such a temper tantrum.
It is much easier to suggest solutions when you know nothing about the problem.
I made no claims whatsoever except to say that his claims appear to be hysterical fabrications.
His response has been to spam irrelevant links and then essentially lie by pretending they prove his assertions
SOMEONE CALL THE WHhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaambulance, Shane needs to have a cry and wait for the world to say sorry.
4 articles, 2 from highly respected Japanese news agencies on the damage to the spent fuel cooling pool, followed by 2 published works on plutonium fire. Your thought bubble exploded when Mr Trump grabbed you by the pussy, Shane.
and now pretend that I'm the one making arrogant and unsubstantiated claims... as opposed to the guy who just claimed that the entire northern hemisphere would be killed off if the spent fuel from a single nuclear power plant were incinerated.
I said: No. Another of the many lessons the nuclear industry had to learn about nuclear safety is that spent fuel has to be moved away from the reactor or you risk a plutonium fire. In Fukushima's case there were so many fuel rods in the collapsing structure that the plutonium fire would be an extinction level event for the northern hemisphere.
and
However none of [Shanes strawman arguments] them are 1500 spent fuel rods, in cooling facility with failing foundations next to a facility with another 6000 spent fuel rods. Nor have they been the focus of an urgent effort to remove the risk because anyone with a
That's like saying the coal mine fire in Centralia is going to grow until it kills everything in the northern hemisphere.
Are you serious, a strawman argument. It's not even a very good one - at least put some effort into it.
This was a quantitative claim you made, not merely a qualitative one. A large plutonium fire would be very bad, yes. I never disputed that.
See, here, this is where you could of backed away, reconsidered your argument with humility and retained your dignity. As simple as saying, oh yeah, maybe in light of this new information storing this stuff on site is a bad idea and I understand now why geologically sound spent fuel containment is a requirement for improving nuclear safety. Thanks for not excoriating me too much MrKaos.
But it turns out there is a lot of "very bad" stuff that happens all the time (including stuff connected to nuclear power, fossil fuel power, and damn near every other major industrial thing we do) that doesn't escalate to an "extinction level event for the northern hemisphere".
However none of them are 1500 spent fuel rods, in cooling facility with failing foundations next to a facility with another 6000 spent fuel rods. Nor have they been the focus of an urgent effort to remove the risk because anyone with a brain and knowledge can recognize the risk. Fortunately the people who decided to act on it had a much better information set than you do.
It would be like you stepping out in front of a fast moving bus on an expressway and then wondering if the kinetic energy in the bus is sufficient to kill you. Chernobyl pumped out roughly 5 tons of material to irradiate 3500sqKms. Are you able to challenge your idealology and conceptualize what burning roughly 850 tons of plutonium in the open air would do over the course of weeks or months that it burned? Inevitably it would spread to the other 6000 fuel rods as they also burned at 3000+ degrees C spreading plutonium oxide and chloride in the smoke for months into the atmosphere all over the northeren hemisphere via the jetstream.
You can't compare it to anything else because there is nothing else to compare it to.
You're just making shit up, thus confirming my original and overarching point about most vocal anti-nuke people being hysterical morons (which does not then imply that the pro-nuke people or the people who designed many of the operational plants in the world today are geniuses.)
You may think your "arguments" are new however they are the same rhetoric of the previous generations who are politically attached to this argument with the same old re-hashed dogmatic skepticism that demonstrates your inadequate knowledge. Those "arguments" are only new to you so since you are unable to come up with something original, why don't you try inquiry so that we can have an intelligent discussion?
Yes, you are right, I'd use pin 7 as well. Using case ground wasn't the right way to make the cable but because 1 was shorted to signal ground 7 it would still work, mostly. Yeah, I remember cts/dts and dsr, for hardware handshaking.
Yeah, serial still comes in handy for mobile phone stuff I'm finding since learning you can trigger some mobile phone headphone jacks to be serial ports. I want to deep dive into android soon so I suspect that I'll be brushing the dust off my memory of the stty command. I was so happy that knowledge I thought of as obsolete, was again new, funny how old knowledge comes back around to you in IT, eventually.
I remember when I started out, making a massive bundle of rs232 cables, it made my soldering perfect and chicks dig perfect soldering:-p
Yeah, I remember spending a lot of time getting my head around UUCP and uuencode. Once I did it made my life so much easier not having to have work come to a halt while a modem transferred a file or running a remote command getting the clients machine to do all the calling to save my phone bills.
uucp made a really good bridge that was really hard to hack. Setup to access an outside system via a serial line a one way UUCP out and no TCP/IP connection to certain core systems, a cracker would have to spawn a getty on the other end of a serial line to get access. Not impossible, but extremely challenging.
Well, look at it another way. Every human action carries risk. Standing up from your chair after reading this, and you might get a brain aneurism and die right there. No countermeasure against a risk is perfect. So to be fair, with nuclear it's not about trying to make the risks zero
The difference is a risk I take on myself as opposed to a risk that is imposed on me. Nuclear power imposes a risk that only the supporters of nuclear power want to take and supporters of nuclear power see no problem imposing that risk on communities that don't want it.
So to be fair, with nuclear it's not about trying to make the risks zero, but to make the risks (translated to dollars) significantly less than the value of the energy created.
To be fair there is no net energy return with nuclear power anyway so the energy generated is offset against future generation expending energy to clean up the mess our generation leaves behind.
Remember, nobody has been killed directly from Fukushima
Well that's not fair either. These people entire community has been obliterated and they have been scattered around Japan where they are treated like an unwanted unfortunate unwelcome presence. The mental health issues alone from this disaster *is* a disaster.
If your lazy mind cannot extrapolate what happens when you take ten times the amount of fuel that is in a nuclear reactor, pack it close together then remove the moderator from between the fuel rods then we're back to you having inadequate knowledge of the things we are discussing.
First they came for pedophiles, then they came for me.
dammit, it wasn't meant to be a pun, it was meant to be an insightful commentary on how we can judge a society by how it treats the most despised and how they can use the same tools on the rest of us, dammit I did it again, I mean spy tools. Now because of you people and your twisted imaginations nothing can undo iterations of that pun from being in my head.
This is the problem with infringing anyones rights, it turns wisdom into a bad joke.
store all of their waste on-site that no one seems to be talking about.
No. Another of the many lessons the nuclear industry had to learn about nuclear safety is that spent fuel has to be moved away from the reactor or you risk a plutonium fire. In Fukushima's case there were so many fuel rods in the collapsing structure that the plutonium fire would be an extinction level event for the northern hemisphere.
Fortunately Tepco has completed removing the spent fuel rods.
It's an onion of bullshit opposed by bullshit, though.
Is this one of those alt-white things? I always get you guys confused with the SJW.
Nuclear is fundamentally rather cheap and rather clean, using sane designs (not designs where it fucking melts into oblivion if it doesn't have constant active cooling, jesus christ what is wrong with those people), and using reasonable accounting based on rational pollution opportunity cost comparisons.
So just dispose of thallium 233 where ever there is an opportunity to throw it? What about your backyard.
people talk ominously about half-lives without ever once mentioning phrases like "Love Canal" or "Centralia" as points o
Because we're talking about how bad nuclear is, not how bad coal is. That's different bad.
That means we are also talking about radionuclides, bio-accumulation, bio-concentration, toxic properties of the metals, decay, spontaneous fission, alpha, beta and gamma radiation in different combinations of electron volts, sometimes organically bound and sometimes not.
economical designs are opposed by blowhards like Carter, etc
You parrot a lot of misguided rhetoric. Reagun rescinded Carters orders. Reactors that chewed up existing waste and solved our nuclear issues were invented, prototyped, tested are far more advanced *and* developed than any theo-rhetoric-al Thorium reactors.
They would have been a much better choice 40 or 50 years ago however they are not such a good choice now because they don't burn DU and they create a new radio effluent problem. So we end up with a Plutonium *and* a Thallium problem, instead of no problem because we are burning up the plutonium for the next 5000 years.
The oil and coal industry lobbied to destroy this technology as it competes with oil and coal by producing hydrogen and electricity. If you want evidence I direct you to SEC 600. onwards of the 2005 US Energy Policy Act.
Maybe they could drop a huge geothermal plant in Yellowstone... yeah, I'm sure the Greens would be perfectly OK with that, if it meant stopping global warming.
It's a good proposal to use geothermal to replace nuclear and coal. There could be a number of them north south east and west. A great base load replacement for coal and nuclear, with solar, wind covering peaks and an evolved consumer of electricity. That could work anywhere to replace coal and nuclear with geothermal.
Nuclear disaster: potentially renders large area uninhabitable by humans for long periods, even if it doesn't kill anyone directly it substantially increases cancer risk for large numbers of people.
I mean, holy shit. Can we please, please, pretty please account for the worst case?
I think Transgenic disease that slowly drives humanity into falling birthrate, population decline, potentially extinction long before the first daughter product of plutonium 239 is produced in 25000 years or so is the existential threat our species face. Wonderful idea nuclear power, but ultimately pointless if it kills us.
Did you miss the part where the explosions damaged the containment building and the radio-isotopes are leaking into the ocean. i.e the containment isn't containing
As for the rest of your dramatization: You do understand that the anti-nuke people aren't smart enough to tell the difference between your made-up script and actual news?
You nutty nukkers with your 'US' and 'THEM' attitude. The lies of the nuclear industry are being exposed by their own incompetence and the rest of us have to clean up the mess. It should be people like you who argued ferociously and demeaned everyone one with concerns, the way you are doing now, that should be forced to get in there with shovels and clean up the mess the way you *forced* nuclear power onto us.
Instead we see you abusing the responsibilities of free speech to anonymously criticize and make baseless claims unsupported by evidence. How pathetic.
Indeed, this is exactly the kind of slimy PR stunt the nuclear industry would pull.
The evidence overwhelmingly showed it was a meltdown and the fuel escaped the reactor and some has even escaped containment.
That's what everyone expected, not what everyone knew. I'm sure we would hear from nukkers claiming there was no evidence of core material being outside the reactor while Tepco was telling us it is contained in the pressure vessel, had anyone made that argument.
M (whose name is Yuichi Okamura, the company spokesman for nuclear power) now tells us “it’s highly possible that melted fuel leaked through".
The latter is the real problem - a better containment design, and they wouldn't have all this contaminated water because it wouldn't leak like it does. Nor would it have contaminated the surrounding town.
The 'real' problem is the nuclear industry flaunts, ignores regulation or just won't pay for improvements to their plants that would prevent accidents like this. This disaster shows us the consequences of running nuclear power in a corporate structure with a for profit motivation. Chernobyl showed us that the same failures come from a government run facility.
That tells us the real problem with nuclear power is the corrupt nature of human beings. Our neocortex might be evolved enough to design a nuclear reactors however our mammalian and reptilian brains certainly aren't evolved enough to run them. Consequently, the real issue for nuclear power is evolutionary lag in the brains of the human beings, not some shiny new reactor design with unknown design basis issues.
Running nuclear power without accident is asking humans to outsmart their own nature, that's the 'real' problem.
Because Yucca Mountain doesn't work and knowledge of regulation, like pumice, can't contain groundwater long enough to convert transuranics to uranicites the way granite can. Even though
By the way, most of those costs you suggest are externalized have already been payed for internally, and the decomissioning fund is healthier than every single union retirement fund in the US.
citation please.
So yes, that's also already been paid for.
Bullshit
Stop lying.
Says the anonymous troll who has no fact to back up their claim. You're such a pussy you can't even put your comments to a real id, that's how empty your "argument" is.
Chernoby cleanup costs (current and future) are estimated to total $235 billion, Fukushima is estimated to be around $200 billion. Three Mile Island was about $1 billion.
This is the cost to *ESTABLISH* cleaning up Chernobyl, how do you support that these are the current and future costs? We have not established the clean-up costs for Fukushima, only estimated, incurring and accumulating.
I have not looked at the status of TMI, have all the core elements been removed? Don't we still have to dismantle the facility? Will it require a New Safe Containment? Will Fukushima?
How much does it cost to dismantle a reactor core that has been operating for 60 years. Will every Nuclear reactor need a NSC to dismantle it?
These are the only major commercial nuclear accidents in history, and their total cost is estimated to be $436 billion.
I guess Lake Karachay and Hanford were done on purpose so do clean up costs there count? Hanford alone is $112 billion and climbing.
What about the cost of the 'non-major' accidents added together, are those costs externalized, like carbon?
What about the cost of spent fuel containment, not the test site at Yucca, a site that can contain radio-products without leaking?
Infrastructure to said containment facility (incidentally, that's why you want to pick a place that works)?
Cost per reactor decommissioning?
What about decommissioning of Enrichment facilities?
Mine tailings clean up, or are those costs externalized onto other countries?
It would be interesting to see the impact of decommissioning even if you ignored everything else. I think it has only been done once and on 150Mw reactor, IIRC it was Yankee Rowe. I dug out the number for you.
A controlled shutdown of a functioning reactor, it cost half a billion dollars to clean-up and it was only 137 Megawatts, less than a quarter of the size of TMI-2. You have to wait decades to allow the *really* radioactive elements to decay. This is because new and highly radioactive elements are created in the reactor core. It's still not something that has been addressed in an industrially proficient way that makes the sites safe or 'greenfeild'. Considering the 104 reactor sites around America are multi-core the United States will be looking at a conservative estimate of a quarter of a *Trillion* dollars, at todays prices, on reactor decommissioning alone.
Insurers refuse to cover nuclear because of how statistics work.
NPPs are underwritten by the Price–Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act. The value of the insurance subsidies for damaged caused are forced onto the taxpayer. Geothermal, wind and Solar don't get that kind of massive underwriting of liability as a form of corporate welfare because they don't need it. That's the flip side of Capacity Factor.
if these did not exist no one would invest in nuclear power as the liability cannot be calculated. Imagine what a hypothetical Indian Point INES7 accident would do to the asset value of NYC. How do you calculate that liability?f these did not exist no one would invest in nuclear power as the liability cannot be calculated. Imagine what a hypothetical Indian Point INES7 accident would do to the asset value of NYC. How do you calculate that liability?
In other words Yes folks, the fuel is indeed outside of the reactor core.
Let's, for a moment, consider what words were spoken inside the TEPCO media relations meeting;
Engineering: Well the robots have indeed discovered evidence of fuel outside of the reactor.
Media Relations: how can you be sure it's outside the reactor?
E: Because we found an area where fuel shouldn't be, a grating melted all the way through and the ES1000 started malfunctioning because the radiation levels were so high. We had to abort before it got stuck in the containment building.
M: Containment Building?
E:Yes, were not sure how much containment was destroyed, but the evidence suggests we are close to locating a section of the melted core.
M:Then all we have to do is reassure people it's in the containment. Susan get me some overalls, we need to do a press conference!
E:-O
M: turning back to E oh, great work, robot broke down - we'll run with that...
This is exactly the kind of slimy trick the Nuclear Industry PR would use to downplay evidence of fuel being outside of the reactor, maybe I've been napping however I've not seen the headline Evidence of Nuclear Fuel Found outside of Fukushima Reactor Core anywhere. I'm just supposed to be comfortable that it's inside the containment as if it's no big deal that it didn't melt *INSIDE* the reactor where it should be.
Why yes it is.
M: Susan, make sure the by-story runs that it is *inside* the containment, we need to make sure the fans have a counter argument. People, we're running with the robot broken down story and that we think it might have kinda possibly run into a tad bit of radio stuff,, we have to get on top of this before the mainstream get a hold of the news. Susan, where are those overalls!
to calm y'all down even further
This article from the Japanese daily contains the video feed from the robot. Above the hole you can see the base of the reactor pressure vessel. Your statement seems a trite summation considering the evidence discovered.
It's perfectly reasonable to be angry about the incompetence that led to this disaster, what's weird is trying to say it's no big deal. The international community who shares the coasts of the pacific ocean will suffer the consequences of this over a very long time. This is what a big deal is.
I don't see any justification for supporters of nuclear energy to play the same morally superior dogmatically skeptic attitude they have had over the last decade anymore, this is an INES7 scale accident. Information is available now, and people can read so what need is less downplaying so we can figure out the nature of the mess the nuclear industry has left us and where these 3 cores are.
Slashdot Mirror
Why? It's always been there. Media have always used publicly leased airwaves to perform mass brainwashing under the guise of "Culture", all the while forgetting that culture comes from the people being brainwashed.
He is a troll, and that's the point. He is trolling the media, using comedy as an instrument and now the media will show their furiously fapping hypocrisy as ppd tries to get them to invoke the striesand effect on themselves. They will shrug saying 'you all know we're lying hypocrites', people will shrug and say 'oh well, at least they're not lying' and go on letting them write history, live.
After some years some media executives will fellate ppd and offer him money because his ideas are accepted as culture. Bill Hicks went through *exactly* the same thing for criticizing culture.
Trump, did the same thing, only skillfully. He utilized the media into saying his message no matter what to humiliate the democrats and as a result whole swaths of political science was created. Trump represents the epitome of the media savvy personality president which clearly shows how bad things have got because Trump and Clinton were the *best* candidates that the media savvy political apparatus could offer. Something is clearly broken.
FTFY
I sense the US faces a different threat. There is no fear of a left led agenda in the US because there is no left wing politics in the US, it's painted that way to make it appear 'fair and balanced'. Politics in the US has become right wing or more right wing. The polar opposite of what the USSR was the US still suffers from corruption and faces a slide into meaningless nihilism where corporations replace the state and corporately owned prison camps assume the role of the soviet gulag.
And to cite Benjamin Franklin, who predicted this moment with words "I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other. "
I single out the media as the key vehicle for that corruption that seeks to 'de-educate' the citizens from critical thinking, and an education system that teaches people to obey and comply. If the USSR is analogous to Orwell's 1984 then the threat to US citizens is similar to Huxley's 'Brave new world' or even Collin's 'The Hunger Games'.
This is the outcome Franklin was trying to draw peoples attention to, that in time the power of domestic enemies (corrupted people - corporations in 21st C) would over power the populous using government as a vehicle. Be under no illusions, the US can suffer the same way as the USSR because the saying 'All roads lead to Rome' isn't talking about roads.
No, it's always been worse. If we all tried as hard as we can, maybe it can be better. That is why left and right wing politics are obsolete.
Your non-chalant attitude about radioactivity downplays the risks
Toxic heavy metals can be terrifying enough, thanks. "Different" doesn't matter. Severity does. And the numbers I've seen show pretty convincingly that nuclear isn't nearly as bad.
Present them.
It's not a very good product. That's why Toshiba is loosing money on this business.
The suspended emergency cooling system makes the containment building a heat exchanger and a pressure vessel in case of an emergency. Not that that's a bad idea, however it's an untested design improvement. It's little wonder clients would be wary, with all the terrorism now a days.
Its primary competitor is the EPR reactor whose containment building is double walled and resistant to military attacks, so it's a much tougher product in comparison.
It's a shame that Toshiba's business is affected by this, but if it means no more AP1000s, that's probably not a thing to be too upset about, these are not the only flaws in the design and it doesn't make sense to complain about capitalism when it is working.
EPRs were planned for US deployment last time I looked at the NRCs proposed deployments so perhaps EPR deployments will take over the AP1000s proposed there. The most appealing features I see is that EPR buildings are divided into four functional trains that can assume control of functions of the other buildings, and the control room is detached from the reactor, which mean better survivability for the operators, which means they have a better chance of getting things under control when there is an emergency.
So it will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
that.
Because that's what she wanted. She wanted performance, risk and excitement in a car and was prepared to mix it with alcohol. She was at her limit and someone else screwed up. Was the vehicle in control? No. Both parties to blame? Yes. Case closed.
Personal responsibility.
However you didn't provide one. You provided something about a chemical fire burning coal at 540 degrees Celsius as opposed to a radioactive fire burning plutonium 3000 degrees Celsius. Vaguely related at best because not even the 'fire' is the same and your effort to construct something resembling a strawman is hopelessly knobbled by a lack of any prescient fact regarding the subject matter. Your overly emotional reply is evidence of that.
You've made quite a fool of yourself today Shane, what makes you think I'm anti nuclear?
Wherever you go, there you are.
I'd only do that if nothing was being done. It's been done now because it was a serious threat that most people would not be able to comprehend. Look at how knowledge of it has destabilized you, you've gone off into such a temper tantrum.
Crybaby Shane said: Also, there's some common sense shit like designing reactors and sites that can store all of their waste on-site that no one seems to be talking about, but is perfectly doable in principle and would at the very least least nerf one very common complaint. Except it doesn't nerf anything but your sense of security.
SOMEONE CALL THE WHhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaambulance, Shane needs to have a cry and wait for the world to say sorry.
4 articles, 2 from highly respected Japanese news agencies on the damage to the spent fuel cooling pool, followed by 2 published works on plutonium fire. Your thought bubble exploded when Mr Trump grabbed you by the pussy, Shane.
I said: No. Another of the many lessons the nuclear industry had to learn about nuclear safety is that spent fuel has to be moved away from the reactor or you risk a plutonium fire. In Fukushima's case there were so many fuel rods in the collapsing structure that the plutonium fire would be an extinction level event for the northern hemisphere.
and
However none of [Shanes strawman arguments] them are 1500 spent fuel rods, in cooling facility with failing foundations next to a facility with another 6000 spent fuel rods. Nor have they been the focus of an urgent effort to remove the risk because anyone with a
Are you serious, a strawman argument. It's not even a very good one - at least put some effort into it.
See, here, this is where you could of backed away, reconsidered your argument with humility and retained your dignity. As simple as saying, oh yeah, maybe in light of this new information storing this stuff on site is a bad idea and I understand now why geologically sound spent fuel containment is a requirement for improving nuclear safety. Thanks for not excoriating me too much MrKaos.
However none of them are 1500 spent fuel rods, in cooling facility with failing foundations next to a facility with another 6000 spent fuel rods. Nor have they been the focus of an urgent effort to remove the risk because anyone with a brain and knowledge can recognize the risk. Fortunately the people who decided to act on it had a much better information set than you do.
It would be like you stepping out in front of a fast moving bus on an expressway and then wondering if the kinetic energy in the bus is sufficient to kill you. Chernobyl pumped out roughly 5 tons of material to irradiate 3500sqKms. Are you able to challenge your idealology and conceptualize what burning roughly 850 tons of plutonium in the open air would do over the course of weeks or months that it burned? Inevitably it would spread to the other 6000 fuel rods as they also burned at 3000+ degrees C spreading plutonium oxide and chloride in the smoke for months into the atmosphere all over the northeren hemisphere via the jetstream.
You can't compare it to anything else because there is nothing else to compare it to.
Here we go with the predictable ad-hom attacks everytime your idealism is shattered, poor shaney wanyney needs comforting. Here is more from the person who describes the international community that created the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale as a blend of supefyingly dull simpletons, hysterical dolts and Machiavellian assholes .
You admitted "I didn't know what I was talking about" then suggested I'm autistic because you didn't have enough knowledge to understand a joke about tritium.
You may think your "arguments" are new however they are the same rhetoric of the previous generations who are politically attached to this argument with the same old re-hashed dogmatic skepticism that demonstrates your inadequate knowledge. Those "arguments" are only new to you so since you are unable to come up with something original, why don't you try inquiry so that we can have an intelligent discussion?
You said: Also, there's some common sense shit like designing reactors and sites that can store all of their waste on-site that no one seems to be talking about, but
Yes, you are right, I'd use pin 7 as well. Using case ground wasn't the right way to make the cable but because 1 was shorted to signal ground 7 it would still work, mostly. Yeah, I remember cts/dts and dsr, for hardware handshaking.
Interesting. What was reading the other end?
Yeah, serial still comes in handy for mobile phone stuff I'm finding since learning you can trigger some mobile phone headphone jacks to be serial ports. I want to deep dive into android soon so I suspect that I'll be brushing the dust off my memory of the stty command. I was so happy that knowledge I thought of as obsolete, was again new, funny how old knowledge comes back around to you in IT, eventually.
I remember when I started out, making a massive bundle of rs232 cables, it made my soldering perfect and chicks dig perfect soldering :-p
Yeah, I remember spending a lot of time getting my head around UUCP and uuencode. Once I did it made my life so much easier not having to have work come to a halt while a modem transferred a file or running a remote command getting the clients machine to do all the calling to save my phone bills.
uucp made a really good bridge that was really hard to hack. Setup to access an outside system via a serial line a one way UUCP out and no TCP/IP connection to certain core systems, a cracker would have to spawn a getty on the other end of a serial line to get access. Not impossible, but extremely challenging.
not if he is using a db25, 1 is ground as well.
9600,8,N,1,XON/XOFF
DB9:pins 2/3/5
DB25: pins 2/3/7
The difference is a risk I take on myself as opposed to a risk that is imposed on me. Nuclear power imposes a risk that only the supporters of nuclear power want to take and supporters of nuclear power see no problem imposing that risk on communities that don't want it.
To be fair there is no net energy return with nuclear power anyway so the energy generated is offset against future generation expending energy to clean up the mess our generation leaves behind.
Well that's not fair either. These people entire community has been obliterated and they have been scattered around Japan where they are treated like an unwanted unfortunate unwelcome presence. The mental health issues alone from this disaster *is* a disaster.
If your lazy mind cannot extrapolate what happens when you take ten times the amount of fuel that is in a nuclear reactor, pack it close together then remove the moderator from between the fuel rods then we're back to you having inadequate knowledge of the things we are discussing.
A mechanism for plutonium pyrophoricity and THE EXTINGUISHING OF PLUTONIUM FIRES.
At 8 - 10 times the size of the reactor core good luck getting close enough to it to put it out.
First they came for pedophiles, then they came for me.
dammit, it wasn't meant to be a pun, it was meant to be an insightful commentary on how we can judge a society by how it treats the most despised and how they can use the same tools on the rest of us, dammit I did it again, I mean spy tools. Now because of you people and your twisted imaginations nothing can undo iterations of that pun from being in my head.
This is the problem with infringing anyones rights, it turns wisdom into a bad joke.
A 200dB sonar ping underwater would be a great way to drive whales out of the ocean. The question is whose sonar ping was it.
Citation needed.
Here ya go .
No. Another of the many lessons the nuclear industry had to learn about nuclear safety is that spent fuel has to be moved away from the reactor or you risk a plutonium fire. In Fukushima's case there were so many fuel rods in the collapsing structure that the plutonium fire would be an extinction level event for the northern hemisphere.
Fortunately Tepco has completed removing the spent fuel rods.
Is this one of those alt-white things? I always get you guys confused with the SJW.
So just dispose of thallium 233 where ever there is an opportunity to throw it? What about your backyard.
Because we're talking about how bad nuclear is, not how bad coal is. That's different bad.
That means we are also talking about radionuclides, bio-accumulation, bio-concentration, toxic properties of the metals, decay, spontaneous fission, alpha, beta and gamma radiation in different combinations of electron volts, sometimes organically bound and sometimes not.
You parrot a lot of misguided rhetoric. Reagun rescinded Carters orders. Reactors that chewed up existing waste and solved our nuclear issues were invented, prototyped, tested are far more advanced *and* developed than any theo-rhetoric-al Thorium reactors.
They would have been a much better choice 40 or 50 years ago however they are not such a good choice now because they don't burn DU and they create a new radio effluent problem. So we end up with a Plutonium *and* a Thallium problem, instead of no problem because we are burning up the plutonium for the next 5000 years.
The oil and coal industry lobbied to destroy this technology as it competes with oil and coal by producing hydrogen and electricity. If you want evidence I direct you to SEC 600. onwards of the 2005 US Energy Policy Act.
It's a good proposal to use geothermal to replace nuclear and coal. There could be a number of them north south east and west. A great base load replacement for coal and nuclear, with solar, wind covering peaks and an evolved consumer of electricity. That could work anywhere to replace coal and nuclear with geothermal.
Nuclear disaster: potentially renders large area uninhabitable by humans for long periods, even if it doesn't kill anyone directly it substantially increases cancer risk for large numbers of people.
I mean, holy shit. Can we please, please, pretty please account for the worst case?
I think Transgenic disease that slowly drives humanity into falling birthrate, population decline, potentially extinction long before the first daughter product of plutonium 239 is produced in 25000 years or so is the existential threat our species face. Wonderful idea nuclear power, but ultimately pointless if it kills us.
it is *inside* the containment
So? That's what the containment is for.
Did you miss the part where the explosions damaged the containment building and the radio-isotopes are leaking into the ocean. i.e the containment isn't containing
As for the rest of your dramatization: You do understand that the anti-nuke people aren't smart enough to tell the difference between your made-up script and actual news?
You nutty nukkers with your 'US' and 'THEM' attitude. The lies of the nuclear industry are being exposed by their own incompetence and the rest of us have to clean up the mess. It should be people like you who argued ferociously and demeaned everyone one with concerns, the way you are doing now, that should be forced to get in there with shovels and clean up the mess the way you *forced* nuclear power onto us.
Instead we see you abusing the responsibilities of free speech to anonymously criticize and make baseless claims unsupported by evidence. How pathetic.
This isn't a surprise to anyone.
Indeed, this is exactly the kind of slimy PR stunt the nuclear industry would pull.
The evidence overwhelmingly showed it was a meltdown and the fuel escaped the reactor and some has even escaped containment.
That's what everyone expected, not what everyone knew. I'm sure we would hear from nukkers claiming there was no evidence of core material being outside the reactor while Tepco was telling us it is contained in the pressure vessel, had anyone made that argument.
M (whose name is Yuichi Okamura, the company spokesman for nuclear power) now tells us “it’s highly possible that melted fuel leaked through".
The latter is the real problem - a better containment design, and they wouldn't have all this contaminated water because it wouldn't leak like it does. Nor would it have contaminated the surrounding town.
The 'real' problem is the nuclear industry flaunts, ignores regulation or just won't pay for improvements to their plants that would prevent accidents like this. This disaster shows us the consequences of running nuclear power in a corporate structure with a for profit motivation. Chernobyl showed us that the same failures come from a government run facility.
That tells us the real problem with nuclear power is the corrupt nature of human beings. Our neocortex might be evolved enough to design a nuclear reactors however our mammalian and reptilian brains certainly aren't evolved enough to run them. Consequently, the real issue for nuclear power is evolutionary lag in the brains of the human beings, not some shiny new reactor design with unknown design basis issues.
Running nuclear power without accident is asking humans to outsmart their own nature, that's the 'real' problem.
Well, why can't we externalize Harry Reid costs?
Because Yucca Mountain doesn't work and knowledge of regulation, like pumice, can't contain groundwater long enough to convert transuranics to uranicites the way granite can. Even though
By the way, most of those costs you suggest are externalized have already been payed for internally, and the decomissioning fund is healthier than every single union retirement fund in the US.
citation please.
So yes, that's also already been paid for.
Bullshit
Stop lying.
Says the anonymous troll who has no fact to back up their claim. You're such a pussy you can't even put your comments to a real id, that's how empty your "argument" is.
You are yet to defend these figures from from the last time you posted it.
This is the cost to *ESTABLISH* cleaning up Chernobyl, how do you support that these are the current and future costs? We have not established the clean-up costs for Fukushima, only estimated, incurring and accumulating.
I have not looked at the status of TMI, have all the core elements been removed? Don't we still have to dismantle the facility? Will it require a New Safe Containment? Will Fukushima?
How much does it cost to dismantle a reactor core that has been operating for 60 years. Will every Nuclear reactor need a NSC to dismantle it?
I guess Lake Karachay and Hanford were done on purpose so do clean up costs there count? Hanford alone is $112 billion and climbing.
What about the cost of the 'non-major' accidents added together, are those costs externalized, like carbon?
What about the cost of spent fuel containment, not the test site at Yucca, a site that can contain radio-products without leaking?
Infrastructure to said containment facility (incidentally, that's why you want to pick a place that works)?
Cost per reactor decommissioning?
What about decommissioning of Enrichment facilities?
Mine tailings clean up, or are those costs externalized onto other countries?
It would be interesting to see the impact of decommissioning even if you ignored everything else. I think it has only been done once and on 150Mw reactor, IIRC it was Yankee Rowe. I dug out the number for you.
A controlled shutdown of a functioning reactor, it cost half a billion dollars to clean-up and it was only 137 Megawatts, less than a quarter of the size of TMI-2. You have to wait decades to allow the *really* radioactive elements to decay. This is because new and highly radioactive elements are created in the reactor core. It's still not something that has been addressed in an industrially proficient way that makes the sites safe or 'greenfeild'. Considering the 104 reactor sites around America are multi-core the United States will be looking at a conservative estimate of a quarter of a *Trillion* dollars, at todays prices, on reactor decommissioning alone.
NPPs are underwritten by the Price–Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act. The value of the insurance subsidies for damaged caused are forced onto the taxpayer. Geothermal, wind and Solar don't get that kind of massive underwriting of liability as a form of corporate welfare because they don't need it. That's the flip side of Capacity Factor.
if these did not exist no one would invest in nuclear power as the liability cannot be calculated. Imagine what a hypothetical Indian Point INES7 accident would do to the asset value of NYC. How do you calculate that liability?f these did not exist no one would invest in nuclear power as the liability cannot be calculated. Imagine what a hypothetical Indian Point INES7 accident would do to the asset value of NYC. How do you calculate that liability?
In other words Yes folks, the fuel is indeed outside of the reactor core.
Let's, for a moment, consider what words were spoken inside the TEPCO media relations meeting;
This is exactly the kind of slimy trick the Nuclear Industry PR would use to downplay evidence of fuel being outside of the reactor, maybe I've been napping however I've not seen the headline Evidence of Nuclear Fuel Found outside of Fukushima Reactor Core anywhere. I'm just supposed to be comfortable that it's inside the containment as if it's no big deal that it didn't melt *INSIDE* the reactor where it should be.
M: Susan, make sure the by-story runs that it is *inside* the containment, we need to make sure the fans have a counter argument. People, we're running with the robot broken down story and that we think it might have kinda possibly run into a tad bit of radio stuff,, we have to get on top of this before the mainstream get a hold of the news. Susan, where are those overalls!
This article from the Japanese daily contains the video feed from the robot. Above the hole you can see the base of the reactor pressure vessel. Your statement seems a trite summation considering the evidence discovered.
It's perfectly reasonable to be angry about the incompetence that led to this disaster, what's weird is trying to say it's no big deal. The international community who shares the coasts of the pacific ocean will suffer the consequences of this over a very long time. This is what a big deal is.
I don't see any justification for supporters of nuclear energy to play the same morally superior dogmatically skeptic attitude they have had over the last decade anymore, this is an INES7 scale accident. Information is available now, and people can read so what need is less downplaying so we can figure out the nature of the mess the nuclear industry has left us and where these 3 cores are.
Evidence of reactor fuel found outside of the Fukushima reactor is the information and the nuclear industry is very carefully avoiding any further criticism.
The article you linked states: Luckman says climate change is certainly influencing this region. Thanks - very interesting.