/sci/ - Science & Math

Yeaaahh man, solar power maaaaan its totally plausable maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan DUDE I'M SO HIGH!

what really happened:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Rtw6wwMmnM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xT9H16sxmLU

>>2693122

Oh god, it's you again. You were the anti-nuke troll yesterday weren't you? Didn't you get enough of a thrashing already?

>>2693122
why do you hate nuclear power so much? What did it ever do to you?

>>2693146

You don't get it, do you?

What these horrific events expose is the inherent risks of nuclear power. What many American readers may not fully grasp is that this could of happened here. We have plenty of plants located in areas that have been hit with devastating earthquakes in the past.

>>2693167
except no it couldn't happen here, because we own haarp.

>>2693167
>>2693122
Sage and ignore the thread, folks.

>>2693191

>let BP drill in deep water, they have the technology, what could possibly happen?

>>2693167

Actually these events expose the incredible safety of nuclear power. This was outdated technology that was crushed by a tsunami resulting from one of the largest earthquakes in history and the thing is probably just going to be flooded with saltwater and boric acid.

Humanity is about progress, not cowardice. If something doesn't work right, but has promise, you continue making it better, not complain about its current fixable problems until it goes away.

>>2693191

Get the fuck out please. You conspiracy theorists have no idea what's going on in the world, producing all your convenient bullshit explanations in place of actual logical conclusions. You cheapen the reality of this event with your pathetic fantasies about secret societies and blaming HAARP for every natural disaster.

NEWS FLASH, THERE ARE NATURAL DISASTERS ON EARTH. HAARP has nothing to do with it. Go back to /x/ where you can say anything you want and no one will ever question it.

here's what really happened:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Rtw6wwMmnM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xT9H16sxmLU

Faggatron, I love you and all, but this would have been more effective about 12 hours ago when the situation wasn't yet under control.

>Japan Atomic Energy Agency announced that it was rating the Fukushima accident at 4 (accident with local consequences) on the 0–7 International Nuclear Event Scale (INES), below the Three Mile Island accident in seriousness[60] which was at 5, a rating that would make the severity of the Fukushima event comparable to the Sellafield accident in 1983 that was also at 4.

>>2693201

They why don't you ask them to build a nuke in YOUR back yard?

Some technologies are simply too risky for civilian use. If scientists want to do nuclear testing in space or miles underground, so be it, but I don't want to get cancer because of greed for energy.

Yeah, let's optimize. Who cares if failure is catastrophic? If we don't fail we run ever so slightly more efficiently and safely than other kinds of power plants.

>>2693239
I wouldn't mind if they built one near me in the slightest. As long as the construction crews aren't so nearby that I can't get any damned sleep.

>get hit by 8.9 earthquake and a tsunami
>don't experience a major nuclear incident
>public perception still gets ruined and people take anti nuke idiots seriously
>mfw

>>2693239
>They why don't you ask them to build a nuke in YOUR back yard?
Believe me, I wish someone would. It would be a whole hell of a lot cleaner and safer than the coal fired plant they have just a few miles away right now.

>>2693239

I would have absolutely no issue with that. I would only require that they use the most modern technology conceivable as the failsafes improve with every movement forward.

However, it should be said that that was a blatant Appeal to Emotion fallacy. You can't do any better than that?

>>2693268

The nuclear industry has a record of lying in order to spare themselves embarrassment. If they are saying "might be a partial meltdown" then the likelihood is that there HAS been a meltdown, they don't know how bad. Everybody stay calm.

And now, in a single move, their billions-of-dollars assets are turned into billions-of-dollars liabilities which will have to be managed in perpetuity.

Anyone proposing NuCuLar solutions should factor that cost in.

>>2693239
Need isn't greed.

Understand that even relatively low levels of radiation can result in point mutations in a base pair coding for a sequence related to apoptosis which may not show up for years, but when it does the results could include neoplasms and/or birth defects. Maybe not "the end of the world," but still a lot of suffering for the victims.

>>2693295
Understand that you are always exposed to low levels of radiation.

>>2693304

Great!
A volunteer to go into the core and do some cleanup.
A little radiation won't hurt you.

>8.9 earthquake
>10000 killed by quake
>out of an entire country of nuclear power plants, only one has done anything even remotely dangerous, nowhere near fatally
>ZOMG NUCLEAR IS BAD LOLZ

If anything, this shows how resiliant nuclear power plants actually are.
Sure they'll need to be rebuilt, but they were pretty much fucking destroyed.
AND STILL FINE

Seen the oil refineries and such in Japan? Those things are giant fireballs.
Sure is safe

Dont worry, china as the largest builder now wont give a shit because CCP leaders are all engineers from top universities and don't care about public opinion

>>2693295
A human body undergoes hundreds of trillions of DNA strand breaks every single day from perfectly normal causes. Guess, what? We're not all dead from cancer.

>>2693281
We know two reactor cores have partially melted, this isn't news, the first one was stated over sixteen hours ago, the second one a few hours ago when the people at the site found out about it.

The rise in radiation measurements is because of the vented radioactive steam and gass. The rise is expected and not all that harble, I get more rads at my summer cabin that's near a uranium mine.

Possibly a hundred people have been contaminated at the site, the worst cases have been in decon and suspected cases are being checked.

No breach of containment has occurred.

The temperature and pressure in the affected reactors is falling.

>>2693322
I didn't know that fire particles were carried on the wind across the globe and lasted for decades, tell me more!

>>2693315
A little radiation actually doesn't hurt you. Some studies suggest that it's actually good for you. Look up the work done by Cohen.

>>2693336

The benefits of nuclear energy are not worth the catastrophic risks involved. That should be one of the major lessons we take away from this disaster. But of course, there will continue to be those for whom the lure of cheap & plentiful energy supersedes the risk to lives & the environment.

>>2693353
Why are you doing this? Does it give you a hardon?

>>2693353
What we actually learned from this, the possibility of any catastrophic accident are astronomically low. Getting hit by one of the largest earthquakes in history and a tsunami and not experiencing a major incident is proof of this.

>>2693346
That which doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

hahahahahahahahah

>>2693368
It's either a troll, or a fanatic that drank the kool-aid.

>>2693340
Way to miss the point, eco-idiot.
The point was that a breach HADN'T occurred, but with oil, coal, etc, explosions kill a LOT of nearby workers, but in these nuclear plants, the worst that's happened after a 8.9 earthquake to 5 or more plants (if you don't understand the statistical significance of multiple reactors being hit by the same earthquake then you should leave life) explose and shorten lifespans by 10 or so years for a few hundred people.
The dangers are actually much less than huge piles of burning rubble.

And the Japanese are quite experienced at cleaning up nuclear things, thanks to some dicks over the ocean.

>>2693353
>catastrophic risks

Since you seem to think this is an example of such risks coming to fruition, what were the catastrophic results?

>>2693353
OH SWEET JESUS YOU ARE THE STUPIDEST FUCK I HAVE EVER HAD THE DISPLEASURE OF INTERRACTING WITH.

YOUR NAME IS INTENSELY ACCURATE

>>2693353
>catastrophic risks
Those are the reason we're constantly improving the designs, building in more and more safeties.

But you still have this blind spot. The amount of death and disease caused by nuclear energy is minuscule compared with what is caused by just about anything else from depression to aviation, from soap-on-the-floor to IT-caused fires.

You're seriously blowing this so out of proportion that it resembles the claims of homeopathy.

>>2693346

No I don't trust "experts." The cult of expertise is not my cult. I find, when I poke at them a little, that I know as much as any "expert" does. And if he can't explain it in plain English--I figure he's lying. No, I don't trust my doctors. Their ignorance frightens me. I get 2nd, 3rd, 4th opinions--but then what can you do? They all work for the same company. Same with airline pilots. And I am even starting--yes, I know it is sacrilege, and, believe me, I suppot rabid environmentalistism, the rabider the better--but I am even starting to question all the "expert" global warming arguments--only because global warming is the number one justification the nuclear power industry now gives for foisting their insane boondoggle on us.

>>2693407
Faggatron confirmed for troll, or possibly a luddite. Either way, fuck off.

>>2693407
...what?

>>2693405

Nuclear energy is just as bad, if not worse, compared to fossil fuels.

Chose one:

1) Bang! (Nuclear accidents)

2) Whimper (Global Warming)

Either way you are screwed.

>>2693407
>only because global warming is the number one justification the nuclear power industry
But that is wrong you fucking faggot.

>>2693397

There have been way more than two nuclear accidents--let's call them incidents since the drools don't like accidents--in the US. Listen to the ongoing Harry Shearer Le Show segment "Safe, Clean, Too Cheap to Meter." And don't say that a comedy show isn't a valid source. He takes his information straight from reputable news sources. All he does is collect it and read it out loud.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox&rlz=1I7DKUS_en&sa=X&
amp;ei=eV18TYa7EeOX0QGendjwAw&ved=0CBQQvwUoAQ&q=harry+shearer+clean+safe+too+cheap+to+meter&
amp;spell=1

>>2693407
You are my most favorite troll ever, you actually put effort into it instead of just shouting LOL U MAD. Keep up the good work and others may learn.

>>2693407

Ahhhhhh...that was a relief. Now I see what type you are. I actually had some delusion that you were just a science type that believed in alternative fuels so much that he was blinded by a perfectly good source in front of our eyes. But now I see that you're really just ignorant and have no idea what you're talking about at all, brainwashed by sensationalism.

Everything we need to know about Faggatron, summed by himself:
>No I don't trust "experts."

Fagga, I am so disappointed right now. I mean seriously. You have had some rational discussions in the past here. Did you contract some kind of Green Rabies?

Settle down a little and take a good rational look at what you are doing.

>>2693407
oh, you're trolling
wow man, you had me by a fucking LEASH. 11/10, absolutely amazing
the
>i don't trust my doctors
and
>if i poke experts with questions i think i know more than them
i mean, you showed your cards pretty hard there, might want to lead us along a little more next time yeah?

>>2693439

Three Mile Island -- strike one. Chernobyl -- strike two. Japan -- strike three. Nuclear Power you are OUT!!!

Speaking of earthquakes, specifically earthquake detection, inverted pendulums are used to measure ground disturbance.

Look them up.

>>2693407
Keep on trollin'

>>2693445
>chernobyl before three mile island

I lolled
Nice trolling though.

>>2693438

Alright a serious question: what happens when the jet stream bring the air from Japan and it mixes with rain or snow? Is this going to contaminate ground water, the air we breathe, the outdoors where our children play? Our government needs to be honest with us because if anybody would happen to get ill from radiation, the insurance companies will cancel our insurance, and the gov't will let us all suffer and die saying it is our fault!

Nuclear Fallout is nuclear fallout. Ban nukes before things get out of hand.

>>2693460
>implying it will be significant if it even reaches the coast.
>implying magic

>>2693460
>ban nukes
I wish your country really would. I could cope with no nuclear reactors if there were no nuclear weapons.
I consider that a fair price, but having one without the other is hypocrisy.

>>2693460
>Alright a serious question
lol, no it isn't.

>http://www.huffingtonpost.com
>Fagwhoever !shitdick

>>2693455

Nuclear Power is NOT safe. Period. All it takes in ONE single mishap and earthquakes are NOT the only risk factor.

>>2693445
Now you're just making me more and more sad.

Don't you really understand why that sentiment is so wrong?

>>2693484
No. Just no. It takes a whole hell of a lot more than a single mishap for anything really bad to happen at a nuclear plant, as is being demonstrated now. Several things have gone wrong, but almost nothing really bad has happened.

>>2693484
>implying all the fail safes in new gen. reactors will fail with the amount of fail safes for the fail safes saving the failing fail safes.

Keep on truckin'

>>2693474

Ah, Yes! Nuclear power: the safe energy source..until it isn't!

Yeah well, if you just build them in a safe place away from earthquakes like in the mid-western United States for example.

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/is-the-new-madrid-fault-earthquake-zone-coming-to-life

>>2693407
If you ask opinions on a problem to n "experts" and each opinion is different then either all but one or all of them are wrong.

on the other hand, if everybody tell you the same thing either they're all wrong or they're all right.

the point is, if you don't trust experts then why does ignorance frightens you? you ARE ignorant, there's no denying in that.
everybody is ignorant in something. and the less important it is, the less chances you will give a fuck.

ignorance does not frightens you, the fear of being ignorant on stuff you give a fuck on the other hand does. that's why you're filling the void with either lies or whatever you pick up from books and lies.

no filters, etc.

Enjoy being less considerate than the average joe out there.

>>2693484
come on man, we got you. we know you're trolling now, might as well just admit to it

on the off chance you aren't trolling. you really need to kill yourself this instant as you've proven to be below the required faculties to function within civilization

but i mean come on, the trolling is OBVIOUS

>>2693484
Nothing is safe. If we had to do things the safe way, we couldn't do anything.

>>2693503

I can't believe you have the gall to speak. Considering what the headlines just above you say--you dare say this? Unbelievable gall. You should be ashamed.

Go back to /b/

>>2693513
holy shit dude you're cracking me up now. this shit is FUNNY

>>2693513
You should be ashamed for such obvious trolling. No one is falling for it anymore.

>>2693122
FAGGATRON_3000 has always been a troll, every good nuclear energy thread on /new/ was tainted with his stink

>>2693484
Driving is NOT safe. Ban all Veichles.
Flying is NOT safe. No more Airplanes.
Mining is NOT safe. Drilling for oil is NO safe. Sending spacecrafts to the moon is NOT safe. Playing videogames is NOT safe.

All it takes is ONE single mishap and earthquakes are NOT the only risk factors.
And the wiimote. shit's dangerous.

>>2693530

Come back and tell us your thoughts tomorrow morning, when a sixth of the island is uninhabitable.

It doesn't matter if a plant is certified to be safer than Chernobyl. Many things can go wrong and create nuclear catastrophes. Including but not limited to: internal sabotage by employees, power outages, military attacks, viral attacks, and natural disasters. We're seeing the latter in the form of earthquakes and tsunamis, and looking at a partial, and maybe complete meltdown of what was thought to be a safely designed nuclear plant. I'm only more convinced that man-made tools of nuclear-energy will be the death of our planet.

>>2693530
>wiimote
don't be flippant, think of all those brave TV's that gave their lives

>>2693529

The nuclear energy shills have been here arguing since yesterday about how safe nuclear energy is, and they are continuing to do so.

They should be given 3-eyed fish for their supper, and with the cameras rolling, they'll just say "Good, more protein!".

>people attacking solar power

>ignoring the fact that the main proponent here agreed it was massively inefficient to use solar power and fission was a better option

Stay knowledgeable, /sci/

"Experts" keep insisting that this can't happen and that can't happen and whatall can't happen.

But how do they know? Theory.

Why do they have no proof, being "experts" and all.

Because this has never happened before in the history of the universe. They're guessing like the rest of us and don't you listen to them for a minute.

These "experts" don't know squat. Every couple of hours I see something different from what the "experts" said before. They are dealing with something they only know in theory, and didn't probably consider even at THAT level. From what I see, the primary concern of most "experts" is to keep the rest of us quiet and marching in line. At some point one has to rely on common sense rather than "experts".

>>2693572

>>2693580

The nuclear fission reactor as a viable source of energy production is now officially dead. The meltdown of not one, but two nuclear reactors in N. Japan could make huge swaths of land in this modern industrialized nation uninhabitable for the next 1000 years. Imagine the scale of such a disaster on the environment and what such a calamity would mean in highly populated areas of America if something similar were to happen here. The nuclear and fossil fuel industries are on their last legs. Green technology is now the only sane alternative for the future. Count on the Republicans and their big industry buddies to fight tooth and nail to the end to perpetuate their lethal and dirty technologies for profit. I'm looking for serious leadership from Obama, but seriously doubt that I'll find it. God help the people of Japan.

>>2693541
Biological Hazards in laboratories.
Chance of a meteorite hitting a laboratory.
No reason to close laboratories.

Chance of a meteorite hitting a nuclear power plant.
No reason to close nuclear power plants.

>>2693572
That would be true if they could see what is happening inside the reactors.

They cannot. Hurrr.

>>2693572
>Faggatron_3000
You have certainly accomplished your primary directive.

>>2693587

Nuclear energy, if exposed from human contact for just a minute, can create instant cancer....so, think about it...maybe we are looking the wrong way with radiation therapy. For sure, this horrible invention of nuclear bombs and energy.

Any nuclear plant is open to disaster including terrorism, earthquake etc.

Yeah you guys keep telling yourselves that the area isn't dangerous.

>>2693593
>instant cancer
just add water

the exposition required for that to happen would imply that you are, in fact, already dead. an "istant cancer" would have to develop so fast you'd get machine-gunned by metastasis in your whole body.

and such a radiation amount would require you to literally swim naked in cesium.

>radiation therapy is wrong
and there it came
faggatron has severed his final ties with reality
the rest is silence
/ignore Faggatron_3000

>>2693601
I wouldn't trust that caption. News organizations often get that sort of thing wrong.

Me and my friends are cracking up at 'instant cancer.' I think that's going to become an in-joke.

>people try and discuss things with faggatron
>continue to do so even though he is trollan
>laughingveterans.bmp

>>2693619

NOONE, will ever use the phrase "Safe, clean nuclear power" again.

Obama's been pushing "safe clean nuclear power" like he's a Republican.
And he cheered the funds for two new plants. Can't be bothered to protect your nefarious mortgage, but he loves Nuclear Power.

It's hard to decide who's dumber, the nation which allows the BP disaster to occur, or the nation that builds 4 nuclear reactors on the ocean in an earthquake zone.

>>2693611

This is a talking point memo. We don't accept talking point memos here. Sell it to your Republican constituents.

>>2693628
Nah. This is just proof of just how safe nuclear power is. A forty year old reactor performs admirably under extremely adverse conditions. New designs are orders of magnitude safer.

>>2693623
No, I'm afraid that, as rare as it is, this time the diagnosis is a case of real stupidity, not trolling.

>>2693628
Just... shut up already, will you? Your credibility has dropped to the same level as that of a soap-box preacher's.

>>2693628
>mortgages are more important that power
All of the people who took out shitty mortgages get paid back with the money from the power stations, and also get their power cut off.

>>2693647
this is interesting. You and Faggatron have the same originating IP address.

>>2693657
I highly doubt that, I'm connected without proxy or nat.

>>2693644

its safe till something goes wrong....not good enough for me

you can talk you talk for or against it, but it comes down to this moment... right now... the reality before us. The benefits of nuclear energy weighed against the potential human disaster ... tell me, this price we may have to pay, is it worth it?

>>2693647

This stuff will circle the globe. Tell me, how many cancer deaths does it mean?

Why is our own government not advising us of this? Is secrecy about nuclear disaster more important that people? Preserve the secrecy at any cost? No government has ever told the truth about the danger. Ever.

I wish it were possible to build a gigantic wall at our atmospheric borders made of all the promotoers of and liars about nuclear energy -- let them absorb the fallout. That would be just.

>>2693666
Something went wrong, and it's still safe. Problem troll?

>>2693666
>its safe till something goes wrong....not good enough for me
>something goes wrong
Why are you not dead/Why have not killed yourself yet?

>>2693673
aww, but then you'll have nobody to troll
I would happily sit inside the plant's perimeter, downwind, for an hour, if I could. The level of radiation there is tiny.

>>2693628
can we, for a second, remember that the power plant damage by a 8.9 magnitude earthquake is 40 years old?

8.9 earthquake, 7th greatest earthquake ever recorded, greatest in japan history. it took down the only power plant that was about to get dismissed because it was too old.

40 years.

You are telling me that after 40 years of glorious american engineering you can't design, project and build up a power plant to sustain AT LEAST a magnitude 7.5?

then yes, you do not deserve nuclear fission power plants. or fusion power plants, or anything even remotely "dangerous".
yet, fucking handguns.

>>2693641
Do you accept visa then?
Radiation of that kind short of swimming in cesium would be produced with much more destructive and immediate forces accompaining them. If you ever get an "istant cancer" that would be the last of your problems.

>>2693666
So about everything that is not completely safe and that could end up in a gigantic fuck up, posted in >>2693530
what about that?
will you stop driving you car, taking planes and trains? will you stop using your microwave oven? will you stop eating beef?

fuck no you will not. heh.

>>2693673
the amount of cancer's that this could produce, IF containment was breached, would be a fraction of what would be caused if people stopped ventilating their cellars at places with high granite base.

Derp OP is a cunt.

All that is needed is better engineering

>>2693679

This guarantees the end of talk about building more nuclear power plants in this country. As if the waste wasn't a big enough issue! Such a price to pay for this wake up call. There is NO way to store nuclear waste.

>>2693685

Nukes are just too dangerous--not because of the technology but because of human error. And we could add to that, obviously, the unpredictability of nature.

There are a handful of people making money on all this, of course . . . as well as salving our country's male insecurities with many weapons of mass destruction. It was many years ago, I know, that we could destroy all life on the planet something like 200 times over. Gives the term "overkill" new meaning, huh?

Some pro-nuke types here have been touting fusion plants
as being the future for a "safe" nuclear energy scheme.

Let's see. Yeah, let's detonate thermonuclear explosions
contained by an extraordinarily powerful electromagnetic bottle.

That sounds fool proof.

I say let's build the first one in Texas, preferably Crawford.

Why, I bet it will make electricity so cheap, limitless and safe
that we won't even need to meter it.
Wait....

>>2693714
>fusion reactor
>goes critical
my god you are fucking dumb as a rock aren't you?

but only someone trolling could state a fact so INCREDIBLY wrong.

>>2693725
Fucking Hell, he's obviously trolling. Give the fuck up.

>>2693239
fuckin A I wish they WOULD build one near my place. It would create a lot more jobs and drastically reduce the cost of fucking electricity here. Shit is fuck all expensive here in Cali.

Also your an ignorant fuck. Just sayin.

Detergent is just too dangerous--not because of the technology but because of human error. And we could add to that, obviously, the unpredictability of nature.

There are a handful of people making money on all this, of course . . . as well as salving our country's laundry-doers insecurities with many stain-removal solutions. It was many years ago, I know, that we could destroy all dirtyness on the planet something like 200 times over. Gives the term "overkill" new meaning, huh?

>>2693673
It will not "circle the globe". hell, even chernobyl had problems getting to FUCKING ITALY from there.

couldn't eat diary and water for a couple of weeks/months as a precaution, sure. but at the time shit really hit the fan.

IF THE ROOF OF THE FUCKING REACTOR ROOM POPPED LIKE A CORK AND THE STEAM CONTAINED IN THERE GOT VOMITED OUT, that's probably the only way it could reach america and provoke serious irradiations.

the chances of this happening is the same of a billion coin flip to end head consecutively. or, to be less bullshit-y, big enough to end up in the "there's-no-fucking-way-that-would-happen-in-real-life" zone.

>>2693707
everything that includes human error is dangerous, the difference between an idiot driving a car and a specialized engineer doing its job is abyssal moreso.

>>2693714
>detonate
nope, try again.

Korean, Russian and American news on this topic are so sensational.

British and French aren't.

Hell even Japanese NHK pretty much says world news is overracting.

OP, this is a good board, and you are fucking it up with your bullshit. Knock if off man.

>>2693735

What these horrific events expose is the inherent risks of nuclear power. What many American readers may not fully grasp is that this could of happened here. We have plenty of plants located in areas that have been hit with devastating earthquakes in the past.

>>2693734

You sound sure. Maybe you should offer your services right now as a spokesperson for the Japanese government, after all, I'm sure they'll feel better once you assure them there's nothing to worry about.

>>2693748
You're avoiding the subject, Mister FAGGATRON_3000

This is like some kind of interactive Fox News. Can someone check if this is being broadcast somewhere?

>>2693751

The subject of what? The lie that nukes are safe?

I'm sure that's why the Japanese have evacuated a quarter million people from the area - because they're certain as you that it will be contained.

>>2693753
Nowhere in my previous posts did i ever write sustaining that power plants are any kind of secure.

However, there are dangerous appliances in your house, as we speak, that could cause and explosion and/or injure you.

Why would you be using such appliances? Are you not a safe man that seeks safety in its actions?

>>2693756

My home appliances won't poison millions of people around the globe.

Anyone who blithely dismisses the likelihood that the reactor vessel will fail with catastrophic results is nothing but an apologist reality denier pro-nuclear tool of the industry.

>>2693762
Oh, but such appliances are present in a million's houses around the globe. and they are an immediate threat to yours and everybody's else lives.

Then why are you using them, again? Why is everybody else using them? Why are they not seeking safety in their actions?

>>2693762
Cigarettes poison millions of people around the globe.
WHAT DO?

>>2693772
Ban that shit, they're for pussy fuckers.

Real men smoke cigars.

>>2693767

Nuclear energy was developed to obliterate people. When people caught on to the fact that that was not so cool after all, more billions of the tax payer's money were wasted on creating the false impression that it was a benevolent technology, mostly as a fig leaf for its military 'uses'. Later the oil companies bought themselves into this technology because it is a large-scale potential successor for fossil fuels.

Renewable energy has not received even a fraction of the kind of tax payer support that nuclear did, mostly because the oil companies are afraid that they will lose their grip. If you can generate your energy on your own rooftop, who needs an oil company?

This is why the oil companies are spending billions on propaganda campaigns to belittle renewables, saying that 'we need more research', pretending to do research or even actually doing that research to get in control of the patents. After all that is the best way to make sure a technology never gets applied.

>>2693775
>cigars
>not more devastating to your health

Okay, bro.

>>2693775
"smoking was banned today by president obama, who made a statement in the white house office telling the public "Cigarettes are for pussy fuckers. Real men smoke Cigars."

>>2693780
I never said anything about them being detrimental to your health.

>>2693775
Better yet, let's evacuate the vicinity of all smokers and then build a wall around the area!

>>2693785
not being detrimental*

They're both pieces of shit but if you do it might as well do it with style.

>>2693785

Then you're a moron. Go back to your cigars, snob fuck.

>>2693790
You smoking cigaretts? You're a taco, a taco made of meat flavored tofu with really bad quality American cheese served by a rapist in a box.

This is the most expensive and hazardous way to boil water ever devised by mankind. If you want us to use these nuclear reactors, please put them in your own backyard. I prefer using the fusion process that's only 93 million miles away from us. We'll be getting all our power from solar panels way before we'll be able to safely use nuclear reactions to make our power.

And I thought that I could derail this thread. Oh well.

>>2693798
It's also the most efficient and cleanest BY FAR.
NAH LETS BURN ALL THOSE CIGAR/ETTES AND HEAT WATER WITH THEM

>>2693797
>You smoking cigaretts?

I don't smoke anything. However it pisses me off to see some cigar smoking assholes act all high and mighty. Most of them aren't even smoking anything good, they buy the cheapest shit possible and then act all hot shit in public places like fucking assholes.

>>2693804

Nuclear power has proven to be so prohibitively expensive that no new plants should be built. Nothing used to generate power comes anywhere near to the cost of maintaining nukes.

>>2693806

The only reason wind, solar and tidal generators won't replace nuclear as the "power source for the future"any time soon is that there's no way for BigEnergy to control the distribution, price and profits if every house had its own power station and every community had its own utility. BigEnergy's only hope is to bamboozle the public into accepting the very obvious dangers of nuclear energy, so they can maintain their tentacle-like control over energy commodities

>>2693806
And now you're changing your argument bit by bit

>>2693805
I don't smoke either but people who smoke in general are fucking weak minded bitches. Imagine the money that goes to cigarette companies going to beneficial medical research.

>>2693778
I Wonder what purpose Steel, Mercury and several extremely inflammable gaseous substances served before they went into the civillian branch to produce energy or to be used in various home appliances.

but i still don't get why you are talking this when we were not even a post quote ago talking about safety that you so long search for in the products you utilize.

But again, nuclear for civillian scopes is more supported because the energy it produces requires less fuel than the "old" coutnerparts coal and oil (or biomass, even) and can produce more energy than the renewable coutnerparts (hydroelectric, geothermal and wind, photovoltaic is not even worth counting in at the time).

This is why it's more popular, has more investment and has mroe reasearch funds put into.

>>2693798
ACTUALLY, the most expensive method for boiling water is coal. nuclear is not nearly as inefficent.

>>2693806
that's why there were several projects to build nextgen plants in several us countries, japan itself and even USA. umh, strange to say at least.

>>2693809
>Tidal Generators
oh boy, now i have the EXACT confirm that you are a troll.
Tidal generators are so fucking costing and produce so far less energy than fucking photovoltaic.
On the other hand, the fact that the entire spectrum of renewable energy producing means cannot sustain a rapidly expanding energy request has nothing to do with them being scrapped.

nope, not a thing.

>>2693812

Bull, the most expensive and unreliable power plant made is nuclear. It's just one of the MANY reasons to oppose nukes. When the Japanese experts fail to stop the meltdown, you'll find out just how ruinously expensive nuclear-generated electricity really is.

>>2693809

Nah, they just an old business man's trick. Sell the panels, the connections to the panels, and build the infrastructure, and bump the price up to huge amounts on each of those. Then people will basically be indebted to your industry and you maintain control.

These are 40 year old reactors, and they still can't explode. In the case of a meltdown the fuel inside the reactor will have a negative void coefficient and will cool passively, even without water present in the reactor.

Worst case scenario, some people have to take iodine pills and have a heightened risk for thyroid cancer (which is highly treatable). This is from the rather low levels of radiation that were released when steam was let out of the reactor to reduce the pressure inside.

3rd generation nuclear reactors wouldn't have even reached this stage, because there are gravity driven passive cooling systems that don't require pumps. They run on natural heat convection + gravity and can cool an active reactor for days.

If anything, this will show the world that the hysteria is completely unwarranted... that is unless the media keeps showing giant OMFGMELTDOWN headlines with subtext 5 pages later that say radiation levels are safe and there is zero chance of an explosion.

>>2693820

The actions needed to make nukes unnecessary is minimal. Low-tech. Conservation. Doing without. Retro-fitting at most.

I know, I know. You "experts" say conservation won't work. Well, I say, you don't know one whit more than I do, true, hardcore conservation having never been so much as attempted on the smallest of scales.

>>2693817
That's pretty unfair.

>>2693829

nuclear power is safe... right up until the time that it isn't... usually about the time that something unexpected happens... which, generally speaking, is inevitable... or until you need a safe place to store all of that toxic waste... or that radio-active coolant-er water... lmao... get a clue O clue less ones... nothing about this stuff is safe... unless it happens to be a million miles away from you, and you happen to be the ones profiting exorbitantly from it

>>2693817

Not everyone who smokes is addicted to it and NEEDS to smoke, but yeah I can see where you are coming from. I'm not too fond of smokers myself.

>>2693821
[citation needed]

>>2693830
>why are you not using candles and what is this "light bulb" you are chanting about? you are one crazy old man, now pass me that oil lamp

>>2693831
Fine, the majority of them.

>>2693821
More people die per year mining coal than have died in the entire history of commercial nuclear power.

Please set yourself on fire in protest of nuclear plants. So we can all live without your stupidity.

>>2693835

This is the time that we have to pause and really ask ourselves as a nation, "are we willing to let the corporatist oligarchy shove the nuclear renaissance down our throats to justify their hollow cries of job creation, when in fact it is a multi-billion enrichment to the coffers of just a few corps like Bechtel & their few cronies?

Japan has shown us, sadly, how unsafe nuclear power can be, especially in these times of heightened seismic activity, now being seen in all areas of this country, but globally as well.

The answer should be a resounding No! There are much safer ways o generate electricity.

>>2693833
>>2693821

You seem to interchange 'nuclear power' and 'nukes' rather readily.

nope.avi

>>2693838

Our nation is blessed with natural resources. We have the space and ability to proceed with wind power, solar, we do not need these nuclear power plants if we develop safer, greener energy.

>number of deaths caused by nuclear accidents, around the world, over the last 60 years: 10,000 (and that's a very liberal estimate)
>number of deaths caused by car accidents, in the US, in just 2009: 37 000 (and this is the lowest number in 50 years)
OMG cars are 200x as deadly as nuclear power. When will we ban these destructive engines of destruction!?!

Oh, but I forgot, you don't trust experts and you don't need real data; you can just poke around that's good enough. Nuclear energy sounds scary, no need for pesky facts or anything

>>2693845
Of course man, didn't you know that nuclear plants have cesium going critical mass?!

They also make marshmallows and rainbows!

alternative energy sources cannot replace the high power density sources we currently use.

We would have to take america back to the stone age to run on green energy.

>>2693852

10 Sustainable Cities
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eva-maddox/10-sustainable-cities_b_814466.html#s229247&title=Masda
r_City_Abu

BEYOND FOSSIL FUELS
Using Waste, Swedish City Cuts Its Fossil Fuel Use
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/11/science/earth/11fossil.html

Europe installs 20 wind turbines a day and 10 EU states reach wind power capacity of more than 1GW
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/feb/03/wind-power-eu

Economics of new nuclear power plants
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_new_nuclear_power_plants

Propaganda from the industry has been rampant.
Not sure you should even be using their chosen terminology when describing the effort that includes the capture of their supposed regulators.

We just saw where that got us with Wall Street. The nuclear industry may create a different kind of depression that no bailout could rescue.

>>2693855


Wow, to everyone who says that wind and solar won't possibly fuel our needs for power, get real. You haven't done your homework, plus, if you can't understand that people would eventually adapt to an infrastructure without nuclear power, then you have little faith in the human race. Guess what? We don't need power to live. Period. Life churned along just fine before electricity was harnessed. It's certainly safer than having to worry about all these countries with reactors that can blow up and spurn radiation over half the world in 30 hours or less.

>>2693857
wow, way to respond to my criticisms, asshat. I point out that the deaths from nuclear energy are negligible, and you send me a link to an article about norway building a wind farm. If you're going to be against nuclear energy because of its cost/lack of sustainability, that's one thing, but don't start hysterics about how many people nuclear plants kill and then ignore the fact that it's barely any.

>>2693866
how about you act as an example on how to live without power and turn off your computer and stop posting?

>>2693866
>Guess what? We don't need power to live.
Haha, good one.
... Wait. You're serious?

>>2693867

We really don't know what we are doing with nuclear power or many other "scientific breakthroughs". If there was the possibility in our scientific brains to prevent this from happening, it would have been utilized. But there isn't, because we are not smart enough to figure it out at this point in our evolution. Also, we can't predict what the Earth will do. Sometimes in our zeal as humans to apply the latest technology, we scrap all normal reason and put everyone in harms way. All it takes is one nuclear disaster. One. Is the risk worth it?

>This thread

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gjfZABX8Kw&feature=channel_video_title

>People keep referencing FUSION power plants...
>Implying mankind has come anywhere close to sustaining a fusion reaction for more than a few seconds before it destabilizes and putters out...

Come the fuck on guys....stop throwing around buzz words ok? sustainable fusion is like the unicorn of science. We may very well NEVER achieve it with all its fucking oddities and difficulties.

>>2693844
Like Coal right? or Oil. Or RIGHT, Renewable resources.

oh wait, those will not sustain the costant growth of the society. damn.

Oh well, i guess we're back to drilling oversea.

>>2693850
You have no natural resources, you have not space left and the whole spectrum of renewable energy production methods will slow down america in the next 40 years. when the rest of the world moves on, america will be left behind.

And why the fuck not, maybe we'll really see north korea invading your sorry ass in a decade or so.

>>2693857
>Europe installs 20 wind turbines a day and 10 EU states reach wind power capacity of more than 1GW
>1 GW
Let's say, what is france/germany share of renewable vs nuclear of produced energy?
riddle me this, why didn't they just install more wind and solar facilities?

because they would have not been able to produce enough energy using the same space and the same money they spent to build and mantain those nuclear power plants.

>>2693866
PROTIP: We can't. Nobody can apparently. Look around.

>>2693874
Planes fly, Cars go, Trains run, Caves work. Technology progress with or without you. And the future is Nuclear.

>>2693877
>sustainable fusion is like the unicorn of science. We may very well NEVER achieve it
Uh-uh.

>>2693879

The problem is, we don't KNOW whether and how nature, or human stupidity, might exceed our design limits. Rare, catastrophic events are feared by the potential victims, and underplayed by potential beneficiaries. Many issues are complicated by the fact that, often, some of the same people are both potential beneficiaries and victims.

But in the end, it all comes down to numbers. Until three INES Level 7 (Chernobyl-scale) disasters have occurred, we won't even have an inkling of the mean and standard deviation on the risk. We silly humans, we're DETERMINED to get that risk assessment data. We won't be able to restrain ourselves, not until we've had at least two more big accidents. Look at the number of oil spills we've created. Have we sobered up about fossil fuels yet?

I don't know about you, but I'd like to see a LARGE portion of the energy we're generating in these dangerous ways being used to build the safe, renewable energy infrastructure of the future. Right now, we're pretty much just burning it all up to maintain the status quo.

>>2693882

>>2693882
As i said, Planes fly, Cars go, Trains run, Caves work. This is our design.

Did 9/11 stop commercial flight? Nope
Did Nagasaki stop nuclear proliferation? Nope
Will this stop Nuclear from being developed? Nope

Get real.

>>2693874
yes. you just said "something could happen; I don't know what, but I'm afraid so let's not do anything."
complacency is the road to defeat. It is absolutely worth the risk to try new technologies as (contrary to what you may believe), even in the worst case scenario, we'll be fine. As has been pointed out, even in nuclear accidents like Chernobyl, where most of the workers were untrained miners, safety mechanisms were purposefully turned off, and the people running the reactor were basically trying to figure out its limits; even in that extreme level of stupidity, the death toll was less than 10 000 people.
Also, I have no idea how you can rant on and on about how great the new green technologies of solar and wind power will be and in the same breath say "we don't need power anyway; the risk of developing new technologies is too great and we should stop"
you are a sad, sad little troll

>>2693892

So safe until you lose power to cool the system... losing power at a power plant...wtf? anyway, nuclear power is not safe, reactor systems are not designed to deal with the possibilities. Expect a lot of spin in the coming days, much like BP telling us that all is well with their dispersant and the oil is "gone"..

>>2693893


Nuclear power can be made as safe as possible, but the "worst-case scenario" for nuclear power is always worse than other power-generating processes. It is inherently unsafe.

>>2693340
>fire particles
facepalm.jpeg

With only one or two major disasters and we are poisoned for centuries and thats not even counting spent waste laying around god knows where in leaky barrels and leaching into our priceless clean drinking water supply world wide.

I understand just fine....................no nukes! when the meltdown comes, and I pray it doesn't...the radio active cloud will head my way in Hawaii and then around and around the world it will go...

>>2693898
>reactor systems are not designed to deal with the possibilities
are you retarded? They absolutely are; they have at least 2 levels of redundancy built in. Look at what happened in Japan: one of their oldest plants was hit by an 8.9 earthquake and a tsunami, and 3 days later it's partially melted down. People take nuclear power plants seriously.

>>2693911

"Pay no attention to those explosions that blew the roof off the nuclear power plant. It was a GOOD explosion that reduced dangerous air pressure in the cooling blah blah blah blah blah...."

>>2693898

3rd generation reactors do not require power to cool. They run on passive cooling systems.

Should the passive cooling systems fail, in the event of a meltdown the fuel is seperated in its liquid form by gravity and cools.

No electricity, no water pumps, no human intervention of any kind is needed to stop a runaway reaction.

4th generation reactor designs don't even need pumps at all, dramatically increasing both the safety and efficiency of the reactor.

>>2693910
Basicly, the only thing you've proved so far in this thread is that you have no idea how nuclear power plants work.

>>2693918

Hey! Nuculear power is safe, and clean and cheap. Plus, my rich friends made a lot of money off of the govment subsidies to create them, and will make even more if we subsidize more new nuculear plants. Benefiting the rich is important, you see, because then they will trickle on the poor.

>>2693914

That was hydrogen and oxygen reacting when they were venting the reactor into the building to alleviate pressure.

Yes, it was an error. No, it was not a nuclear explosion.

>>2693914
yes, part of the building collapsed, just like thousands of buildings around Japan.
Oh my god, you're right. Buildings are inherently dangerous. No matter how prepared we are, we can't be certain we can withstand anything. This earthquake has taught us that there are natural powers that will destroy our carefully built structures.
The risk is too great! Tear down all buildings! from now on, we live in trees and caves!

>>2693898
Yeah, not like they're designed to resist a 7.9 Magnitude earthquake, right?

I can't even remember the last 7.9 that happened in the last 30 years. do you?

>>2693900
Worst case scenario of cars is a chain explosion longs kilometers.

the chances of this happening are pretty narrow, but why risk driving your car into an explosion?

>>2693910
Commercial Flight. Two Major distasters, 5 Wars started.
NUCLEAR ARE YOU EVEN TRYING?!

>>2693914
>Building blows up due to high temperatures during cooling
>Reactor Still Standing
>HURR THE REACTOR EXPLDOED HERP DERP

The casing doesn't kill you, the bullets do.

>>2693923
HURR Y U NO USE RENEWABLE POWER AND MAKE ME MONNY?!

>>2693923
>you have no idea how nuclear power works
>hurr, durr corporations are evil and are rich and evil

Sorry to support faggotron in this case-

But they just confirmed the meltdown is happening

http://wyckynews.com.au/current-events/japanese-nuclear-meltdown-confirmed/

>>2693929

>implying trees and caves don't collapse and are safe

>>2693935
meltdown != fallout 1/2/3

>>2693936
oh fuck you're right.
OK, we have to kill the human race. It's the only way we'll be safe!!!

>>2693932

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....

>>2693934

Thought needs to be given towards GETTING OFF OF NUCLEAR POWER. There are other hazards that as dangerous as earthquakes. And the inconcievable does happen now and then.

All I'm calling it, Im giving this troll a 10/10, sometime I have never personally done before, I'm actually impressed he managed to cause such a shitstorm on /sci without it being a religion thread. That takes real dedication to your art.

>>2693935
no. This was mentioned earlier. 5 feet of the rod was exposed, it melted slightly, and then it was flooded with water again (which caused the steam build up).
Not a meltdown. A meltdown is when the rods are exposed long enough for them to melt on themselves (and the building itself), begin to bore a hole down, and release tons of radioactive cesium and iodine. Not what happened here

>>2693943
it's still a big deal. on the other hand, the other reactor got flooded with seawater i hear.

>>2693946
Hey guess what, we will not get renewable energy because it costs too much.

Enjoy paying more for your placebo.

>>2693929

It doesn't matter to me which components failed. It matters to me that people are being exposed to toxic radiation.

Do you understand why that would be important to some?

>>2693935
> wyckynews.com.au

>>2693935

This does not provide any new information. It has been known that there was melting of the fuel rods for more than 24 hours. This does not mean that it has achieved 'meltdown.'

>>2693946
The inconceivable has happened twice so far (3 mile and this right here; I'm not counting chernobyl because that was malicious incompetence, not some unexpected accident)
During the time that there is no horrific accidents, nuclear energy is one of the cleanest power sources we have. It is estimated that 30 000 people die each year from coal plant pollution in the US alone. Nuclear is hundreds of times safer.

>>2693955
no one is being exposed to toxic radiation. Everyone within 20 km (possibly more by now) has been evacuated, and the plume of radioactive steam went towards the ocean and will have lost almost all of its danger by the time it reaches any inhabited areas.

>>2693955
Because renewable energies do not produce waste to set up.
And you're right, we should not invest in some sort of lobbyst fucking system to bring us "renewable energies" that will probably work just for the members of the lobby, and the rest to go off as the most expensive energy ever produced.

>>2693961

You pro nuke folks, just don't seem to get it. They continue to try and minimize it and explain it it away, blame on human error, as if that mattered.

>>2693952

They don't create deadly waste that can't effectively be disposed of. The price is worth it. What else is there to know.

>>2693955

Then you should not be concerned! The newer the reactor, the lower and lower the chance of this becomes. In fact, the 40 year outdated Fukushima reactor is at no significant risk of emitting dangerous radiation. Even if the thing melted down, the containment chamber is created with this in mind. Most of the radiation would be contained and there would likely be concrete poured over top to further this.

>>2693968

I"m sure that's why the Japanese have evacuated a quarter million people from the area - because they're certain as you that it will be contained.

>>2693972
More people die every day in auto accidents then the number of deaths caused by nuclear power plants. where is your concern for them?

>>2693972
nuclear waste can be disposed of in less space than it would be needed for renewable energies to produce a millionth of the energy currently produced by nuclear power plants.

>>2693977
You would make for an horrible president, you would only move people if there was a real danger and it was certain. by then it would be too late to avoid casualties.

>>2693914
The outer part of the building blew up and yet the core remains contained. As it stands, the plant has endangered far less people than the huge gas plants that burnt out of control.

Surely this is a testament to the great degree of over engineering of the containment vessel.

>>2693977

Even if you were relatively sure, you wouldn't evacuate them? I know I would. If that risk can be avoided, it should be.

>>2693971

Japan is windy (wind power), has lots of coastline (surf power) and plenty of mountains (hydroelectric). Alternatives are there and I am sure they will now recieve more consideration.

>>2693972
>They continue to try and minimize it and explain it it away, blame on human error, as if that mattered.
of course it matters. That's the whole point.
If you had 1 way of generating power that steadily killed 10 people a year, and a second way that has a chance to kill 100 people every 30 years, it's obvious which one is better. Unfortunately, the second way is far more news-worthy and noticeable which is why it is opposed.
It's the same reason people freak out about things like airplane crashes or shooting sprees: a thousand times as many people die from car accidents than from airplanes, and a thousand times more people die from firearm accidents than from shooting sprees. But those things are steady and less noticeable, so they aren't focused on.
You're wallowing in mindless sensationalism. The death count from this accident is 4 people so far and you're calling for an end to all nuclear power. There have been deadlier skiing accidents.

>>2693989
Nuclear makes up for over half of japan energy production.
Renewable resources don't even get a 10%

>>2693989

Wroooooong. Japan is already investing in the next generation of nuclear power plants! Furthermore, solar and wind energy are still not cost effective to produce. When the day comes that they are, then maybe you will be right.

>>2693971

The people who are going to get richer are the Koch Brothers (Georga Pacific lumber company) and the Weyerhauser family.

I doubt that Japan will recycle all that wood into new housing so the profits on the stock alone of these timber companies will be enormous, let alone the contracts to come.

And watch out for the Republicans who are going to push through deregulation so environmental protection of endangered species will be gone. And there will be a renewed land-grab for national forest resources with few permits required to clear cut.

I've seen this clear-cutting strip whole sides of mountains in WA and BC and I'm sure in CA and OR it's happening as well. Be prepared for a massive propaganda campaign to get this through Congress. No old growth forests will be left or even relatively new timber once the rebuilding is going strong.

>>2693992
Cumulatively, sandcastles are more deadly.

>>2693986

Here are the problems I have with the official "story".

When the Containment Structure, you know, the building that's supposed to CONTAIN all that radioactivity, EXPLODES, That's NOT a good thing. That tells me the "Containment Structure" is no longer containing much of anything.. Additionally, when all those control rods, the ones that are supposed to stop the nuclear reaction, start melting, that indicates to me that they are no longer "controlling" the nuclear reaction in a predictable way. Hence the need to attempt to drown the reactor pile with sea water in a probably futile attempt to bring the reaction under control

>>2693996
Japan imports most of the wood from china.

>>2693996 environmental protection of endangered species will be gone

I fucking hope so, are you aware of the horrible clusterfuck the laws are as they currently stand?

>>2693992

The electric company has to test annually for the building housing the reactor ability to withstand seismic activity. Until now TEPCO (the electric company) has constantly assure the government and the public they are testing it for maximum seismic impact and it passes the tests. Then today they came clean and admitted they had only tested it up to a 7.9 quake which is significantly less than an 8.9.

They are dumping the sea water and adding boric acid because they don't have a clue what else to do and they know a meltdown will occur so they are trying to minimize the damage. It isn't enough and they know it, but it allows them to look like they have things under control.

Sort of reminds me of how the oil companies had all these great emergency controls in place and promised to stop a leak immediately then it comes out they had no plan at all.

>>2694001
If you are not going to take this seriously then there is no point in arguing with you.

>>2694004
they do not know if a meltdown will occur, they are pumping water and boric acid in it because they know it will reduce damage, you wouldn't put shit into a nuclear reactor having a fusion in its core without knowning exactly what you are doing.

what was the last 7.9 earthquake you heard of?

>>2694009

Google "Spread of contamination Chernobyl"
If the core melts down completely it will send up a cloud of particles into the jet stream.
Right now they are talking about the relatively low emissions
from a (possibly still semi-contained) event.
Keep posted for changes in that scenario.

>>2693989
you have no idea how anything works. Japan is one of the most densely populated areas on Earth. Hydroelectric power nearly always requires flood a huge area of land.
I live in Quebec, and the Hydroelectric James Bay Project flooded 35 000 square-km to generate power. That is 1/10 of the total area of Japan. And it doesn't even generate enough power for Quebec (less than 8 million people); there's no way it way it would generate enough for the 125 million people in Japan
Japan is trying to reclaim land from the ocean; that's how desperate they are. they're not going to give up 1/10 of all they have for a fraction of the power they need.

I think the primary issue here is that Faggatron lacks a perspective of scale. He seems to think that nuclear energy should be so perfect that there would be no incident when a 9 richter scale earthquake and a tsunami smash part of a nation. This can only be due to him not understanding exactly how calamitous the coincidence of these two events are. If he did understand this, he would view the Fukushima event much as the denizens of /sci/ do, which is an astonishing success for outdated technologies in the face of overwhelming natural disaster.

>>2694021
I think the primary issue here is that Faggatron is a troll and /sci/ is the easiest board to troll

>>2694012
This reactor is build completely different then Chernobyl. If a meltdown happens in this reactor it will be completely contained in the pressure vessel.

>>2694012
This power plant != Chernobyl

It's not even the same scenario, the same structure or the same material involved.

>>2694021

By tomorrow the administration and the nuclear industry will be making statements all around about how little danger this supposedly is -- and we still won't know what the truth might be. Maybe in five years they'll tell us, maybe not.

>>2694024

Bullshit. The whole world is easy to troll.

>>2694025

There are no nuclear energy experts in Japan warning the public of the real dangers going on at these failing power plants. There are just the Government and TEPCO talking heads towing the government line saying that "everything is fine." This is not acceptable.

>>2694029
they will be talking about all the victims of the catastrophic earthquake that struck japan and reassure everybody that japan did a wonderful job containing it and not making it into another chernobyl after the greatest earthquake to ever struck the country since records can show.

and then they'll reassure the population that the power plants of the rest of the worlds are at least more secure than a power plant built 40 years ago.

>>2694037

a nuclear plant is in "partial meltdown." also, nuclear power is safe.

what else ya need ta know?

>>2694032
It is acceptable because japan already knows how hazardous nuclear is.

i mean, even america should know that, you bombed them twice.

>>2694038
a nuclear plant is in a "partial meltfown" after being struck by an 8.9 earthquake and a tsunami, and that is only one out of three reactors that were built 40 years ago.

also, current nuclear power plants are safe.

what else ya need to know?

>>2694032
>If the government says that the reactor is melting down and everyone is going to die, I'm right
>If the government says everything is fine, they are covering up, and I'm right

>>2694047

the point is that nukes should never have been considered in the first place

http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/nuclear_power_risk/safety/

Tell me about the massive governmental subsidies that are necessary to prop up this unconscionable monstrosity of a program. Just for starters.

>>2694046

"Experts" keep insisting that this can't happen and that can't happen and whatall can't happen.

But how do they know? Theory.

Why do they have no proof, being "experts" and all.

Because this has never happened before in the history of the universe. They're guessing like the rest of us and don't you listen to them for a minute.

>>2694057
Every form of power is hugely subsidized. Solar and wind because they aren't economical enough yet, and oil and coal because of entrenched business interests.
You can't call for more research into cleaner energy and decry the government subsidising nuclear as a sign it's ineffective.

>>2694012
people overestimate the ill effects of radiation poisoning.
the area surrounding the central has been evacuated, and that's were the higher doses of radiation will be present.
Elsewhere the radiation will be lower than background radiation or radiation we absorb normally from other natural causes.


http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs303/en/index.html

>>2694066

sigh. Another "expert" pretending like he knows something when all he does is work for somebody.

Radiation kills. That is all we need to know and don't let the paid shills tell you otherwise.

>>2694063
what the fuck are you talking about? We've had over 100 years of experiments on radioactivity and nuclear physics. Scientists are well aware of how these things work and how to prevent them; that's why we have all of those safety redundancy systems. Nuclear theory alone is very well developed, and there is plenty of practice as well.
I think I've figured out your problem: you think because you're horribly ignorant and scientifically illiterate, everyone is so you discount everyone else's opinion.

Yes, nuclear power is 100% safe - until it isn't.

And that is why we don't want it.

The use of nuclear energy with it's radio active waste or bomb material by product, to only boil water so to turn steam turbines, is absurd.

It is like using a cannon to get a fly.

>>2694057
Energy need that cannot be filled by renewable energies or old non renewable sources.

Something that you still cannot comprehend.

>>2694063
"Experts" know what they are doing. If they weren't we wouldn't have nuclear power plants in the first place.

They are not expressing hipotesis, they know what happens whithin the core and they know what they should do to avoid it. the point is what they need to know is not feasible or is outright dangerous.

also, their guessing are better than your guessing, because you didn't study several years the subject they are guessing about.

TL;DR -> no 12 years in nuclear engineering? shut the fuck up.

>>2694069
Fire kills, Why are we using it? hurr durr.
Bullets kill, Why are we using them? herp derp.
Cars kill, Why are we using them? hurka durka.

etc, this is the fifth time in the thread i have to resort to this, try for once to change your faulty logical scheme will you?

>>2694069
>Radiation kills. That is all we need to know and don't let the paid shills tell you otherwise.
holy shit you are a retarded. You are exposed to tons of radiation every day. From the sun, from the ground, from space, from medical tools (if you went to the doctor, but you're a paranoid shit).
Everything in medicine is a matter of dosage. Saying "radiation is bad and any amount will kill you" is like saying sodium is deadly and you should never eat any salt because too much can cause problems.

>>2694075
> "Experts" know what they are doing. If they weren't we wouldn't have nuclear power plants in the first place.

Zzzzzzzzzzzz.....

. When a solar panel goes, no radiation is released. Same for other clean energy. Chaos theory predicts such extreme possibilities becoming actualities. Why gamble with the future of humanity. Invest in, create jobs for, fully fund research in green technology. Lets lead into the future, not follow an outdated past.

>>2694073
>Yes, nuclear power is 100% safe - until it isn't.
welcome to the real world. Nothing is perfect. Everything action is a risk-benefit analysis.
if you want a perfect, 100% safe life, go freeze yourself in a block of ice and launch yourself to the moon

>>2694069
THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WERE ILLED BY WATER IN JAPAN LAST DAY!
WATER KILLS!!!11!WHY ARE WE STILL USING WATER!!

>>2694080
calling us sheep doesn't mean you win

>>2694080
you clearly have no idea how solar panels are produced. A lot of toxic chemicals there, so stop pretending they're 100% clean
Also, it's irrelevant because current technology doesn't allow us to get all our power needs from solar. You might as well say we should power everything on hamster treadmills, since both are about as well-developed right now.

>>2694081

The problem is that you don't even need extreme circumstances. This apparently was a power failure. Who knows what can create a power failure. 3 Mile Island was due to human error. Chernobyl was due to some half assed experiment. There can always be SOME reason why, whether it's nature or human error, that can create together or separately, a nuclear disaster. This is inherently - INHERENTLY - too dangerous a technology to use in common practice. It simply is. What you're saying is a variation of "it can't happen here". It CAN happen here - it already did - and it can happen virtually anywhere. Few places in the world are immune from natural disasters, which appear to be escalating, and NO place in the world is free from human error. Hopefully this is the END of nuclear power.

>>2694073
>Yes, <_____> power is 100% safe - until it isn't.
>And that is why we don't want it.
>The use of <_____> energy with its <_________>, to only boil water so to turn steam turbines, is absurd.

Yet it still produces enough energy for it to be valuable. jelly?

>>2694080
Not enough space to produce enough energy. call me when you have higher yields than 1.7%

>>2694081
thats only safe till the sun goes, not nearly safe enough for faggot man here

>>2694080
>Same for other clean energy.

You are an idiot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vajont_Dam

This alone killed more people than nuclear energy ever did. You can take your fucking clean energy and shove it up your ass.

It's even more dangerous, and its supporters are fucking murderers.

>>2694095

And if I burn down my house, I won't have to worry about the cold.

A. Nuclear weapons have everything to do with nuclear reactors. I do not need to explain this to anyone whose job does not depend on denying it.

B. A nuclear plant goes kaflooie. So how do the thrillers keep pitching their mire?

Alright, so this one went kaflooie. But not as bad as it could have gone kaflooie. And the new ones won't go kaflooie! Believe me. I know more than you do. I know numbers! 342. 5674. 1,234,576,298. Excellent numbering!

Yes, you ARE a genius,

>>2694094
3 Mile Island had no real effect on people. That's like saying "omg, you failed to stop at that stop sign. There are inherent risks with driving; we were lucky this time but we should stop gambling with our lives."
Chernobyl was retarded so I'm not even going to cover it. If people want to do stupid tests, they're going to find a way, with or without nuclear power.
This was a once ever 20 years earthquake, and once again, 4 people have died. You are losing your shit over an accident with the bodycount of family sedan falling off a cliff.

>>2694102

If there is a full meltdown it will cover the entire island. They would have to leave the country and the airports are packed with people trying to fly out. Not an option for them now. They are Japanese scientists with a small daughter. Pfizer moved them to the U.S. then laid them off and they just moved back to Japan and now this.

>>2694098
>>2694098

the power failure in the nuclear central was caused by the breaking of a dam, which buried a whole town

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRYsQ6xqzEM

and yet nobody cries about the dangers of dams.

>>2694100
yawn, now you're getting desperate and just cranky. It was entertaining for about 2 minutes; I was hoping someone stumbling on this thread would learn something from what everyone else posted, but there's no way they're still reading with your level of shit posting.
I'm off to do something more educational, like reading conservapedia.

>>2694094
>The problem is that you don't even need extreme circumstances.
>8.9 earthquake and tsunami to endanger two out of three reactors
>you don't even need extreme circumstances.

This is as near as you get to the worst case scenario. in the worst case scenarion, you get it by a fucking meteorite the size of texas.

>>2694100
A. The same way Wind power has to do with Hurricanes hurr durr

B. How many power plants did survive the earthquake without damages?
All of them but one.
Why did that one get damaged?
40 years old.
>Well, shit, i wonder why it got damaged.

>>2694106
>If there is a full meltdown it will cover the entire island.
fullretard.jpg

>>2694100
So not only do you not know how nuclear reactors work, you don't know how nuclear bombs work or how to do math. Fucking genius!

>>2694107
the first 1:20 seconds is the village being washed away by the water from the dam.

>>2694108
>I'm off to do something more educational, like reading conservapedia
harsh, bro

>>2694107

make sure your statement gets to all those people in japan...the ones living in the 25 mile radius that was evacuated. and to the ones at 20 miles and 10 feet too.

I just wish I had access to microfiche so I could look all all the claims by nuclear scientists back in the 1960's and 1970's about how safe nuclear power is.

>>2694111

We don't know when or where a tragedy such as this will happen next....what should be known more then ANYTHING is that Nuclear Power IS NOT safe. No matter how someone might spin it...it is lethal and if fully capable of eliminating a whole population. The risk is not worth the reward. We have created a monster, and that monster is nuclear power in any shape or form.

>>2694119
Yeah, not the thousand dead by the earthquake or the twenty and more thousands still missing.

Do you even realize the fucking disaster that hit japan?

any other region of the world experiencing that would have just crumbled to its knee crying like a baby.

Japan is probably the toughtest country currently standing on the surface of this fucking geoid.

>>2694123
>I don't know
Somebody else knows that a 8.9 will not likely happen when you're not near an earthquake-happy rift.

>inb4 rift

>>2694123
All risk can be managed and engineered to be minimized. Its the same reason planes don't fall out of the sky. There are things that millions of people do every day that are less safe then using nuclear power.

>>2694132

This could easily happen in the US. Not far from where I live is the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, located just north of San Diego. This went online in 1983, nearly thirty years ago. Interestingly, it features much of the same technology as the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant.

Southern California is known for serious earthquakes also. I could not image what evacuating Southern California, Catalina, and the Channel Islands would be like.

>>2694119
Yeah, keep disregarding how hydroelectric is much more dangerous, you fucking murderer. The blood of thousands is on the hand of people like you who support such crap, you deserve to die.

>>2694135
>This could easily happen in the US.
a 8.9 earthquake followed by a tsunami?

well, i would sit back with my bowl of popcorn. i doubt that, however.

>>2694119
you mean the ones who are still alive and perfectly safe because the authorities had the time to evacuate them? as opposed by the ones who were buried by the water from the dam without time to do anything? or the ones who were intoxicated by the burning fumes from the oil refineries?

or the thousands of people who were killed in the biggest fucking earthquake ever registered?

>>2694136

Waiting from the expected brainless poster to say...

"nuclear power is clean power"

Give it a few decades. When electric cars are mainstream and price of fossil fuels goes through the roof, there will be no other option than nuclear. We can afford to neglect nuclear.. for now.

Strategic Earthquake is Strategic

>>2694148

we are getting delayed, and sanitized news reports. That is the industry norm when dealing with nuclear events.

What is more important is that they are taking action to reduce radiation exposure in the civilian population, and that is hard to hide or dismiss... They would not evacuate people after a major disaster unless they felt responsible for human life, because the evacuations put stress on an already stressed relief effort.

They have evacuated 200,000 people because of their reactor problems.
They have been testing these refugees for radiation exposure, and a number have been hospitialized for treatment... A significant fact in light of their statements that the releases and radiation levels are too small to be a major health concern.
They have been issuing iodine tablets to pre-emptively treat iodine exposure from the fallout.

They may not be honest in their press reports, but at least they are doing the right thing towards the civilian population. As far as official news reports are concern, I can cut them some slack in the middle of a crisis because I would not want to panic people... The truth will come out eventually, it is too big an event to hide it for long.

>>2694152

http://www.therenewableplanet.com/blogs/the_daily_green/archive/2007/04/09/Living-in-Chernobyl-Healt
hier-than-Polluted-Cities.aspx

God, that HuffPo thread proves liberals can be just as anti-science as conservatives.

Also, there's always one guy proselytizing about thorium. he posts in every fucking comment thread lol.

>>2694165
They have evacuated around 80,000 people in 1 20km radius around plant 1. They have tested 160 for radiation.

>>2694165
We are also getting flooded with bullshit from faux news and other idiotic and extremely unreliable "news channels"

the numbers given might or might not be real, they are ofcourse estimated at the time.

Most importantly, all the informations on the problems are with the engineers and specialists on site that have to deal with the problem, and the specifics of it are either not interesting to the general public and thus not reported or simply kept for the engineers and the people that are actually doing their job there risking their goddamned lives.

>>2694165
I've seen you since /new/, and I hope you know you're probably the dumbest tripfag on this website.

>263 posts and 13 image replies omitted. Click Reply to view.

WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU PEOPLE RESPONDING TO A KNOWN /NEW/ TROLL

PROTIP: GOOGLE FAGGOTARD'S POSTS, HE DOESN'T EVEN WRITE THEM HIMSELF

>>2694152
nuclear power is clean power hurr durr

No, really, why do you bother? You think that ignorance of yours is going to spread?

>>2694182
Some people just want to watch the world burn

Hey dudes, I'm trying to convince relatives that there won't be a nuclear catastrophe affecting thousands (let alone millions) of people.

Any advice? Sources are appreciated.

>>2694177
>We are also getting flooded with bullshit from faux news and other idiotic and extremely unreliable "news channels"

You should see the crap they say in my country. They reported the accident is rated INES7 and said how it's already confirmed to be on the level, if not worse, than Chernobyl.

>>2694188
Just show them some of faggotron's posts, they will want to believe the opposite of what he says so they dont sound like complete morons

>>2694188
It's Japan and they know their shit, if only one plant of the several japan has had problems there's a reason, and that reason is that the plant was about to get dismissed after 40 years of activity. 40 goddamn years, if that thing survived the biggest earthquake in japan's history Japanese know their shit when it comes to safety.

>>2694190
No information on it, as far as we know it's still classed INES4. but i guess it's gonna be classed AT LEAST a 5 by now.

tsunami kills 5000 - no big deal
nuclar meltdown may kill hundreds - OMG THE SKY IS FALLING

>>2694182
because some unaware guy could pass by and decide to read the thread, and might end up believing the troll.

Also I'm bored, I wanted to fap but it's raining so I have nothing better to do.

That's it. Cars are finished. There is no way public opinion will allow another car factory to be built in the next 20 years thanks to this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vN25svmIr8

This video With My Favorite Music describes what these look like....these are too dangerous to exist...I don't care what experts say about safety in cars, I don't trust experts....that's why I don't wear my safety belt because exparts say it prevents death......if you disagree I won't listen to you....

>>2694195
>No information on it, as far as we know it's still classed INES4. but i guess it's gonna be classed AT LEAST a 5 by now.

Yeah, and our news reported YESTERDAY, that it was INES7. It's no wonder, since we are going to have a referendum on allowing nuclear plants to be built again in a few months.

Idiots like these who report blatantly false information to further their political agenda should be thrown in prison. But no, they appeal to freedom of speech.

I have nothing of value to contribute to this discussion, but I wanted to thank Faggatron for making one of the funniest posts I've ever read.

>>2693407

>>2694208
Report them for spreading false information. sucks tho.

>>2694165

Where is your evidence for this? You can spout motives and conspiracy theories all you like, but until you have some hard facts you have no credibility.

>>2694165

You're happy to cherry-pick the numbers from new sources such as the amount evacuated, but become extremely sceptical whenever they stop supporting your argument.

Bumb