goodbye japan ;_;

File: 218 KB, 940x636, melt.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

t-shirt !pants1bKj2 Mon Mar 14 12:21:42 2011 No.2701984 [Reply] [Original]

goodbye japan ;_;

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:25:42 2011 No.2702000 >>2701984 keep reading conspiracyfag

>>	t-shirt !pants1bKj2 Mon Mar 14 12:28:42 2011 No.2702012 >>2702000 cool trips brah

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:31:42 2011 No.2702025 I'm still waiting for a huge explosion that will cause the entire island to sink and kill off those nips. At least that would be exciting.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:34:42 2011 No.2702038 >>2702012 thanks >>2702025 I guess that's cool, I mean I only live here.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:35:42 2011 No.2702042 They don't cool the reactor to prevent explosion but to prevent meltdown. No explosion can take place inside of the reactor. What kind of faggy website is that.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:38:42 2011 No.2702058 >>2702042 True, but let's suppose there is a meltdown and at the same time another hydrogen explosion... wouldn't we be sending molten uranium and plutonium all over the place. Captcha: Emergency :)

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:41:42 2011 No.2702070 File: 316 KB, 635x971, TEPCO.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Wow! It's fucking nothing! All reactors in subcritical status. Shows over, time to close the gaping pieholes and return to the regularly scheduled programming.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:41:42 2011 No.2702071 I hope this whole earthquake-tsunami-meltdown thing isn't going to interfere with my manga viewing

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:41:42 2011 No.2702072

>>2702042
The Japanese government is not being truthful about the amount of radiation that has been released.

The USS Ronald Regan is 100 miles off the coast from ground zero!

If they're detecting radiation from that distance it sure as fuck doesn't sound like "within legal limits" to me.

All you "realist" here are trying to find every excuse you can to say nothing bad is happening.

>>	t-shirt !pants1bKj2 Mon Mar 14 12:43:42 2011 No.2702076 File: 21 KB, 590x398, 1266249959600.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >limited radiation release http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/14/japan-quake-amano-idUSLDE72D24320110314

>>	t-shirt !pants1bKj2 Mon Mar 14 12:44:42 2011 No.2702080 >>2702071 didn't japan ban all the anime and manga a few months ago?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:46:42 2011 No.2702091 >>2702058 Nope

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:47:42 2011 No.2702097 >>2702072 Cite your source or begone with ye.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:47:42 2011 No.2702100 >>2702080 all the articles say "ban" but all they did was restrict loli hentai and things like nudedy to 18+, and 18+ manga can no longer be displayed in full view in stores.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:49:42 2011 No.2702109

>>2702080

No, they just restricted all the decent stuff and put it in the porn section of the shop.

Incidentally, the man behind that ban thinks that the earthquake is "divine retribution" for Japan's decadence.

http://www.sankakucomplex.com/2011/03/14/ishihara-quake-is-divine-retribution-against-japan/

This is apparently normal behaviour for Japanese politicians.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:52:42 2011 No.2702116 File: 71 KB, 337x337, 12438929534084.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2702076 >"The Japanese experts and authorities on the ground are doling their best to stabilise the situation," >doling their best >doling

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:52:42 2011 No.2702117 >>2702109 American theocracy 2.0 dear god howcome I get to live in countries where religionfags are in power.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:58:42 2011 No.2702139 >>2702076 That has to be the most dolled-up and poorly written professional article I've ever read. And none of her facts are correct.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 12:59:42 2011 No.2702141 >>2702025 Obama won't let that happen. The radio just announced Obama's strong ties to Japanese culture in Hawaii and now hes diverting supplies from Iraq to Japan.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:01:42 2011 No.2702153 >>2702097 >>2702097 http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2011/03/14/uss-ronald-reagan-dodges-japanese-fallout/ Keep thinking this won't spread.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:02:42 2011 No.2702157 >>2702109 >that fucking website How about lolno?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:04:42 2011 No.2702168 Every hour this drags on is another hour where something entirely unexpected can happen, resulting in atomic butthurt. Original reports said it would take 24-48 hours to disperse the heat after the control rods were in. Cascading failure FTW.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:05:42 2011 No.2702175 Hello sunshine, goodbye rain, She's wearing my high school ring on her chain. She's my steady, I'm her man, I'm gonna love her all I can.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:06:42 2011 No.2702180 >>2702157 They link to their sources, and he did say that. Something doesn't automatically become untrue because it's reported by a sensationalist source.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:08:42 2011 No.2702186 >>2702180 You forget the rules, sources are no longer required since /new/ started showing up here.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:10:42 2011 No.2702193 an island of pedophiles is about to get cancer and die horribly. this is a bad thing? i know 4chan is full to the brim with lolicon pedofags but that shit has gotta go.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:11:42 2011 No.2702197 >>2702153 >missed the part where the radiation levels were the equivalent to dirt, rocks, or spending a bit of time in the sun.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:11:42 2011 No.2702199 >>2702193 There are at least 400 orphaned lolis up for adoption in Japan.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:12:42 2011 No.2702200 >>2702199 DO WANT. Economic recovery by sale of children!

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:16:42 2011 No.2702208 >>2702200 The free market will ensure the best lolis sell for a fine price. The rest of us will just have to buy Persocons.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:26:42 2011 No.2702234

So much misinformation about this whole thing.

first things first, if the core melts down/has melted down.
it is no big deal, the containment vessel WILL NOT BE BREACHED.
it is designed to contain this very thing.
the reason they hadnt flooded the core with sea water to begin with to cool it, is that will write off the reactor and it can never be used again.
reactors are not cheap,
can you see why theyd want to do everything else possible before writing it off?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:31:42 2011 No.2702250 >>2702234 Conservative here. So does this prove that nuclear power is safe and solar and wind power is a waste of time, or not?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:32:42 2011 No.2702255 >>2702250 Nuclear power is extremely safe when implemented properly. At this point in time we do not have the technology to implement solar energy effectively....

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:33:42 2011 No.2702260

>>2702234
>WILL NOT BE BREACHED

So many overconfident engfags in here. A 4ft concrete wall strong and hard to melt. Until, that is, some talking head gets on and regrets to inform us that "due to an unforeseen circumstance" containment has been breached.

inb4youredoingaheckofajob

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:34:42 2011 No.2702261 >>2702250 no as with any new source of energy there are drawbacks, but as far are ecological/health risks, nuclear is fairly risk free, AS LONG AS THE REACTOR IS NOT EXPOSED TO THE ATMOSPHERE. Caps for emphasis.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:34:42 2011 No.2702262 Sir - your logic skills are showing.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:36:42 2011 No.2702271 >>2702255 Truth >>2702260 If I knew you in real life I'd make a bet with you that it will remain contained. It's exactly what the things have been designed to do and refined repeatedly for 50 years after similar accidents.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:36:42 2011 No.2702272 >>2702260 >implying its concrete its metal... i forget what meltdown it was last time, but the core melted 5/8 of an inch of the containment....

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:38:42 2011 No.2702280

>>2702250
Solar and wind will never be a "waste of time". They are entirely renewable self-perpetuating energy sources of zero emission. It's simply a question of how good we are at using them. Realistically solar power is just utilizing the massive nuclear power source of our solar system, much like steam is used to utilize the power of the reactor in Fukushima. The issue with fission power is the storage of it's waste, currently we are just locking it up because it's highly radioactive and could be used to create weapons, however this is not a permanent solution by any means. Nuclear fusion is the ideal nuclear power, currently the generator being tested in California uses up radioactive waste as opposed to creating more of it.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:39:42 2011 No.2702286 >>2702271 I don't think it WILL happen, but if the odds are attractive enough I'd certainly take the bet. lrn2orings

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:40:42 2011 No.2702287

>>2702280

Waste issues is solved anyways. Countries such as Finland are already showing underground repositories to work. The fact that Obama shot down Yucca mountain sucks, because it's going to be forever before the US has a safe storage facility now.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:40:42 2011 No.2702291 >>2702255 Solar and wind power is called Alternative Energy is because we already tried it and It Doesn't Work. IF we're going to support Nuclear Energy, we need to completely dismiss this green movement and go back to reality.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:41:42 2011 No.2702296 File: 3 KB, 199x176, Trollface.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2702291

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:42:42 2011 No.2702297 >>2702271 Pretty sure the power plant is like 40 years old. Just sayin'.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:42:42 2011 No.2702298 >>2702286 What do orings have to do with this? do you really think thats how they seal these things?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:42:42 2011 No.2702299 >>2702287 Obama shut down Yucca mountain? I thought he was pro-science.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:43:42 2011 No.2702307 >>2702299 Yeah, it's old news by now but it still sucks. >>2702297 Most plants are, but they are constantly being re-fitted and re-designed with more and better safety systems.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:44:42 2011 No.2702310 >>2702297 True dat mah brother, but dig; they be straight refinin' that shit even tho the reactor be old. Sayin' they still refine on the design and upgrade from time ta time, ya dig?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:45:42 2011 No.2702314 >>2702271 Apparently one of the reactor manufacturers, Masashi Goto said that the steel dome might not be strong enough to hold it cause they weren't designed to withstand a heavy tsunami or earthquake.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:45:42 2011 No.2702317 >>2702299 >>2702307 Really Harry Reid shut down Yucca. Was a fucking sad day for nuclear power and science.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:45:42 2011 No.2702320 >>2702307 Did he at least have a plan to deal with all the nuclear waste? Why doesn't he approve breeder plants?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:46:42 2011 No.2702324 >>2702298 The fact you can't draw the line tells me all I need know. Let's talk odds/payoff. >>2702299 My gut on that is that it has more to do with Harry Reid and state reps than EOP - a back rubbing thing.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:47:42 2011 No.2702328 File: 14 KB, 268x282, In Rod We Trust.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:47:42 2011 No.2702331

>>2702320

He's just going to let it sit where it is for now. We do have plenty of space and time to deal with it, but it's still stupid not to pursue the repository option.

Concerns about nuclear proliferation. Something that I think could be handled.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:48:42 2011 No.2702333

I remember having a conversation with a few people a couple of months back, discussing the dangers of nuclear power, even with modern reactors.

They basically told me that metldowns and nuclear accidents wouldn't happen in the future. I told them that hey, shit happens, you can't plan for everything. They called me an idiot and pointed out that the last nuclear accident was in '86.

God I love not being a fucking dipshit idiot.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:48:42 2011 No.2702334 >>2702317 >>2702324 Yeah I don't know who was actually behind it, just that it happened under his watch.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:48:42 2011 No.2702335 >>2702320 Breeder plants have some security concerns I believe. And no, the government is just sticking with the status quo, in that the waste is to be stored on site. Fucking horrible idea considering the number of sites.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:50:42 2011 No.2702339 >>2702333 If the goddamn hippies would let us build modern reactors it wouldn't.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:50:42 2011 No.2702340 >>2702333 Nuclear power plants not built on quake zones are fine. Deal with it.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:51:42 2011 No.2702341

>>2702335

The security concern is that it's easier to make dirty bombs or worse from the final waste since it's much more radioactive. It is also easier to store though, being a much smaller volume.

We just need an international organization of some sort to keep track of it all and make sure it ends up buried.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:52:42 2011 No.2702343 >>2702340 Deal with what? Being correct?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:52:42 2011 No.2702344 >>2702333 But you are an idiot. The plant in question was built in 1966, finishing in 1971, hardly making it modern. Therefore your counter-argument to your friend's argument on modern reactors is invalid.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:54:42 2011 No.2702347 PATROLLING THE MOJAVE ALMOST MAKES YOU WISH FOR A NUCLEAR WINTER.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:54:42 2011 No.2702348 >>2702333 Whenever there is a catastrophic failure mode, it carries a positive probability. Build your countermeasures, calculate your probability, then add at least one zero for cascades, hubris and general human stupidity.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:54:42 2011 No.2702352 Nuclear technology is so fucking caveman. Think about it. You put hot radioactive rods in water so it boils. It's a fucking step above coal burning.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:55:42 2011 No.2702355

This 40 year old plant survived:

1) A 8.9-9.0 earthquake
2) The loss of all external electricity
3) A giant tsunami that took out every on site generator
4) Two hydrogen explosions
5) A partial meltdown

over the course of a couple days. Despite all this there hasn't been any serious radiation leak.

Deal with it.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:55:42 2011 No.2702359 >>2702352 >implying nuclear fusion is caveman technology We're getting there.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:56:42 2011 No.2702360 >>2702355 Also, fucking this.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:57:42 2011 No.2702363 >>2702341 Define dirty bomb. The breeder reaction produces some plutonium as well as other isotopes. That's the security concern. Also: the liquid metal cooling has its complications.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:57:42 2011 No.2702364 >>2702339 The problem is that they're pushing Solar and wind on us. Its simple scientific fact that there is no way to power the entire united states with their idea of clean energy without destroying our economy.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:58:42 2011 No.2702370 >>2702355 >40 year old plant My car has survived similar catostrophes. It's a 70s Mercury Cougar. Coincidence? I THINK NOT!

>>	FAGGATRON_3000 !U0FKfqmRjs Mon Mar 14 13:59:17 2011 No.2702375 Wow. The uninformed whoops are at it again. I wonder how much more land has to be poisoned before people learn.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:59:42 2011 No.2702374 Photovoltaic cells produce energy cheaper than Nuclear Power. Plus you don't get fucking nuclear meltdowns.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 13:59:42 2011 No.2702376

>>2702363
I had no definition other than bombs made to throw out a lot of highly radioactive material. They do produce those things, though it is considerably more difficult I think to engineer a true nuclear bomb than to build a less sophisticated but still deadly weapon from it. Either way, you don't want it in the wrong hands.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:00:42 2011 No.2702377 >>2702364 I'm curious what you mean by "without destroying our economy?" Consider me stupid. Could you explain that?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:00:42 2011 No.2702378 >>2702374 >>2702375 oh boy the trolls have arrived

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:01:42 2011 No.2702381

>>2702374
Anon is retarded. /sci/ has already established that nuclear power does not result in meltdowns.

GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS
GEORGE SOROS

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:02:42 2011 No.2702385 >>2702363 And yes, the sodium (and other) types of liquid cooling are not very safe. Last I read (articles from a few years ago), those were still the current methods. Don't know if they've improved at all. France seems to be doing fine, though.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:03:42 2011 No.2702388

>>2702348
I'm not adding a zero, it's counter-productive in the long term.

Efficiency depends not just on reliability but making the most of opportunities, if you miss an opportunity due to draconian safety measures you will only be worse off later and ironically in a more vulnerable position. Grow or die. Of course you shouldn't pour money into white elephants, the point is to assess risk properly because even if you are totally selfish and only interested in your own security it is still beneficial to innovate.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:04:42 2011 No.2702389

>>2702376
A dirty bomb made of any waste is going to be deadly. I don't think the breeder waste is anymore deadly. On top of that, produces less waste.

The point is that the plutonium produced is nearly weapons grade. There are a lot of new fuels being tested to just simply limit or avoid producing those isotopes.

Yes you'd have to still purify the waste to build a true weapon but why not just try to avoid producing any.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:09:42 2011 No.2702402

>>2702377
Its simply not economically feasible to stop conventional fossil fuel power plant production and start building more expensive and yet less efficient solar and wind plants, while in the middle of 2 wars, a recession, and competing against China who has almost no fossil fuel regulations.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:09:42 2011 No.2702403 >>2702355 So deal with being correct? How do I do that, just continue being correct? Ok, done.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:09:42 2011 No.2702404 >>2702389 Because by reprocessing we can extend the nuclear fuel supply by 10-15 times. It's a giant difference. It's something that might be too useful to say no to, especially if we start running thin on fossil fuels.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:10:42 2011 No.2702409 >>2701984 lol apples

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:11:42 2011 No.2702414 >>2702404 Oh I understand that. As long as they are strictly regulated, yeah sure why not. I'd just rather not see breeder reactors as the primary source of nuclear power. Shit is stacking up in france as it is.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:14:42 2011 No.2702428

>>2702402
I don't think anyone aside from assholes and trolls are even suggesting a total stop to one and a complete adherence to the other. I honestly think maybe a few bad apples have spoiled it for you when it comes to people who advocate clean technologies. I'm pretty much the biggest hippie fuck I know, and even I think it's silly. It's not about doing a 180, it's about the end result, and getting there as soon as we reasonably can, even if that's thirty years down the road. (Though, I'm sure we can agree getting off oil faster than that would be awesome.)

Hell, I'm even cool using nuclear as a transitional power. Then again, I think Yucca Mountain is a good place to dump it... I wouldn't mind living there.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:16:42 2011 No.2702437

say it with me:

uranium is a non renewable resource

uranium is a non renewable resource

uranium is a non renewable resource

uranium is a non renewable resource

uranium is a non renewable resource

uranium is a non renewable resource

uranium is a non renewable resource

uranium is a non renewable resource

uranium is a non renewable resource

nuclear is not a long term solution.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:17:42 2011 No.2702440

>>2702414

Yes it would have to be. France doesn't have much storage space at this point, but they can build repositories or export it to countries that do have them.

I might also point out that there are ways of reducing the danger of the waste as well. It's not exactly easy to get hold of. It doesn't even leave the plant until it's totally sealed up and moved to a facility for vitrification or to be put in canisters. I think it would be impossible to steal any of it period without being noticed immediately.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:18:42 2011 No.2702447 >survives 2 nuclear weapon payloads in 1945 >dies because a fairly old powerplant goes 'pff'

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:20:42 2011 No.2702458

>>2702437

Are we ready to go fully renewable? What happens in the interim while renewable resources are being developed? When we start to run out of conventional resources?

Nuclear power can easily pull us through (at least electricity wise) for another few hundred years if we reprocess so that those renewables can be developed.

Furthermore, nuclear is a long term solution in the sense of fusion.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:20:42 2011 No.2702461 http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Nuclear_power_plants_map_France-fr.svg I know people in Valence (South east), and trololo them everyday with phonecalls.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:22:42 2011 No.2702470

>>2702437
If the entire fabric of society collapses in 5 years because we simply dont have enough power because of ridiculous environmental laws, then whats the point?
Life is a constant challenge of compromise and opportunity. We need to drill for oil for our society to function, and environmental disasters are inevitable.
Nuclear is still better than oil, we can switch to it now, and make it more efficient as time goes on.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:28:05 2011 No.2702485 [DELETED]

File: 126 KB, 432x378, 239_sd.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

There are two guys. One is a scientist who comes up with a brilliant theory which could shake mankind's worldview and lead to numerous technological applications. The other is the only person who can understand that theory and make it understandable to other people. The scientist can't make the theory understandable by himself and he needs the other person's help but the other guy couldn't have come up with the theory on his own.

Who is more important?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:29:42 2011 No.2702488 >>2702437 Spoiler: There's no such thing as "renewable energy." Even the sun is going to burn out someday. The entire universe is moving toward entropy.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:35:42 2011 No.2702514

>>2702488
way to take it to the logical extreme. you and i both now what i mean. earths supply of uranium will last us what? 100 yrs? then what? were not putting the money into renewable because of corporate red tape

the US cant afford to have hundreds of reactors. the way we play world police makes us an easy target, and reactor sites are just a sitting bullseye.

mining, transporting, enriching uranium is still a co2 intensive process, so ur not cutting out fossil fuels by any means

nuclear=environmental chaos, arguably worse than fossil fuels..what to do with waste???? oh ya lets dig a whole and put it in the ground...trololololo
also, mining will destroy habitats and ecosystems.

overall nuclear is a horrible transitional fuel at best. its like a nicotine addict that smokes :"lights" because they have "less nicotine"

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:36:42 2011 No.2702516 File: 8 KB, 251x251, 1299402040665.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2702488

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:44:42 2011 No.2702553

>>2702514
So what, we're going to go cold turkey and risk total collapse without a plausible energy solution at all?

Until an effective, economical, and practical solution can be found, we're better off sticking to technology we already know and use, and thats nuclear. We know how to make nuclear plants work reliably, we can't make solar panels work in the same way.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:47:42 2011 No.2702570

>>2702553
do you realize how much nuclear costs? plants need 30-40 years to be up and running and billions in investment. all that for what? to dismantle them again and move onto a different technology? all that effort wasted on a knowingly transitional energy..im not saying i have some solution but nuclears not it.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:48:42 2011 No.2702571 File: 17 KB, 256x352, laughingelfman.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2702514 >will last only 100 years ITC: alarmist fags everywhere

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:54:42 2011 No.2702608

>>2702570
We already have the infrastructure and the technology to build those plants, its just a matter of scale. We don't even know where to start with storing energy with such a finicky solution such as solar. And whos to say that dismantling broken or outdated solar panels and batteries won't have the same economic costs? They're made of toxic and heavy metals thats as disruptive to the environment as any nuclear meltdown.
Capital is scarce now, do we really want to waste effort on an unproven technology? We can wait another 20 or 30 years for something more proven.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:58:42 2011 No.2702622

>>2702570

Nuclear is the only viable "green" option. Natural gas could fill the gap, but obvious environmental issues this early on (fracking, plant explosions in the NE USA), plus carbon emissions, makes it unpalatable. And it definitely doesn't require 30-40 years to set up a plant. Maybe 10 at most, but yours numbers are off.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 14:58:42 2011 No.2702625 So like... What would happen if somebody took a backhoe and dumped a half ton of soil on the fuel rods? What if they filled up the containment vessel with soil? What would happen? I think it could work.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:00:42 2011 No.2702638

Any news on that deep sea movement that they say's gonna trigger another 6.0+ earthquake in the next couple days? How about the false earthquakes we've been getting inland near Fuji? How long until that erupts? Is the eruption of the Kyushu volcano over yet? Did they cool off reactor 6 yet? Why are the fuel rods exposed at reactor 2 AND 3? There's so many questions.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:03:42 2011 No.2702654 >>2702625 what would happen is you get a lot of irradiated soil in exchange for not doing anything to help the problem.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:04:42 2011 No.2702659 If everyone jus started to build molten salt reactors all problems would be solved. They are safe and clean way of producing energy.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:07:42 2011 No.2702681 >>2702625 When you breach the reactor that has shitloads of preasure inside it you basically en up with huge explosion that will spread the nuclear material into the air.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:07:42 2011 No.2702683 >>2702402 They also have air that isn't fit for the Olympics.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:08:42 2011 No.2702689 >>2702514 try 4,200 years

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:09:42 2011 No.2702695 File: 205 KB, 692x659, 1242714690745.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2702689 >>2702571 >Don't understand the simple arithmetic of exponential growth.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:10:42 2011 No.2702708 File: 24 KB, 480x360, API_9-2_Million_APITV-83R.wmv_snapshot_00.01_[2011.03.14_12.08.13].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>2702622 nonsence, the API has shown that we have enough domestic natural gas for the next 50 years.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:11:42 2011 No.2702712 >>2702695 >assumes all the uranium we've mined now is all we'll ever have >doesn't know bout my thorium reactor.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:14:42 2011 No.2702732

>>2702683
For all the money we spend researching alternative energy, we can spend on laying the foundations for the latest generation of long term nuclear reactors, and the money we'll save in the long run we can use to invest in technology that might actually work.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:17:42 2011 No.2702752 >>2702712 Okay, but that doesn't relate to what I said and it doesn't prove that you understand the concept of exponential growth. Look at oil, our use of oil has been doubleing every 10 years. The same will happen if we shift to nuclear power.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:17:42 2011 No.2702757

>>2702708
>nonsence, the API has shown that we have enough domestic natural gas for the next 50 years.

That's entirely besides the point. The technology is in an exploratory phase right now, and already people are having their tap water become flammable and there have been a whole slew of plant accidents. If this is anything vaguely like how natural gas-powered generation will turn out in the long run, it's an awful idea.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:36:42 2011 No.2702857 >>2702757 >people are having their tap water become flammable Who managed to fuck up that badly and how.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:36:42 2011 No.2702858 >>2702708 >implying 50 years is a long time

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:40:42 2011 No.2702883 File: 164 KB, 744x628, 03_uss_enterprise_cvn_65.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >my boat when nuclear power is completely safe

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:41:42 2011 No.2702887 >>2702857 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwogQWLEqW8 Check out the related videos, google "fracking"

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:46:42 2011 No.2702918 >12 second half life HOLY SHIT

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:46:42 2011 No.2702920

The rational solution to this energy crisis of the future would be to start the mass production of goverment subsidised solar power plants immediately and to add some stability and secondary power to those areas where solar power is impractical build molten salt based nuclear reactors.

We still have enough time to deploy massive solar plants and to build the necessary superconductive distribution grid and all other storage and maintanance facilities. After that we should turn our eyes towards fusion and it's possibilities.

This is of course basically impossibility bacause to work this project would have to start now and be supported at least by the USA, EU, China and India. And because those cannot cooperate they dont start anything untill it's too late. All of them prefer either buying oil or invading for oil.

Bacause the nations wont act untill it's too late we can only hope that the corporations will. That too is probably only a dream because once oil is running low and oil is too expencive to burn for energy then next logical solution is cheap coal. Only when solar is advanced enough/others are too expensive and it's cheaper for corporations ti build solar will the change start.

Problem with that is that while it will hapen when solar is the way to go i fear that it's already too late to build the massive amount of infrastructure needed for solar to work on global scale.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:46:42 2011 No.2702922

I think an applause should go out to the men and women working on site at the nuclear power plants. It takes a lot of guts to risk your life working next to something that is on its last legs and helping to prevent it from becoming an even greater catastrophe. If things get worse, they'll be the first to feel the effects.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:47:42 2011 No.2702925

>>2702920

If there are not enough energy produced that leaves only two possible situations to hapen:

World energy usage per person will drop and this means that we will march backwards in our advancement.

Massive war erupts over the last remaining resources and with so many nations that have acces to nuclear weapons that can end horribly.

To combat this we should atleast build those nuclear plants because we can do that already. We should try to aim tovards the ideal situation and not work to ban nuclear power because it's one less options to go if we are not allowed to build it.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:47:42 2011 No.2702931 >>2702920 > superconductive distribution grid You're fucking delusional if you think that's a practical idea. You'll lose more energy maintaining superconducting temperatures than you saved in transmission losses.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:48:42 2011 No.2702935 >>2702920 Fotovoltaics are expensive and absolutely inefficient. Thermal solar is only viable in warm areas. A distribution grid like the one you are talking about would have insane costs.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:49:42 2011 No.2702936

>>2702638
>Any news on that deep sea movement that they say's gonna trigger another 6.0+ earthquake in the next couple days?

Already happened, still happening, earthquakes pending.

>How about the false earthquakes we've been getting inland near Fuji?

We don't know they were volcanic in nature and they were really weak, little 2.0 earthquakes.

> How long until that erupts?
Nobody can say but it's been overdue for about a decade. I doubt it'll be soon and in accordance with this disaster though because of how many sensors we have on it that aren't showing any warning signs.

>Is the eruption of the Kyushu volcano over yet?
No.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxUjK0C71yE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qb2mGblxSes
Not only has it been erupting since it started, but it has been giving off wicked lightning shows and lava as well.

>Did they cool off reactor 6 yet?
No.

>Why are the fuel rods exposed at reactor 2 AND 3?
Because the coolant emptied out.

Seriously though, you guys should watch those volcano videos. Cool looking shit.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:49:42 2011 No.2702939 >>2702437 Why is it the sheeple who always ask others to chant a mantra? Nuclear power will last us through peak oil. And THAT is why it is vital.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:49:42 2011 No.2702941

>>2702752
And again you refuse to accept that there are many more sources than your 100 years number implies. Even if we only bought ourselves 300 years, that's enough time for something better than fission.

The only thing I see you saying here is that having finite resources invariably leads to shortage. No shit Sherlock.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:52:42 2011 No.2702953 As each day passes, the rods cool still?

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:52:42 2011 No.2702956

>>2702935
Maybe that's why i said this:

>This is of course basically impossibility bacause to work this project would have to start now and be supported at least by the USA, EU, China and India.

Solar can work but if we want to start today then we need to make it so that costs don't matter ans that's why this kind of mega project needs goverment support.

Basically money is only a limitation if you let it be with big enough goverment support money can be left out of the equation and then only thing there is to worry about is resources.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:54:42 2011 No.2702967 >>2702956 >basically money is only a limitation if you let it be with big No, it's not. Wasting large amounts of money on such a stupid project would be retarded.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 15:55:42 2011 No.2702977 >>2702025 ISLANDS DO NOT FLOAT THEY ARE MORE LIKE FLAT TOPPED MOUNTAINS BUT EVEN THAT IS A STRETCH IMPLYING THEY CAN SINK IS JUST SILLY

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:01:42 2011 No.2703005 >>2702953 Is this true guize?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:01:42 2011 No.2703006 >>2702967 Dumbest person in this thread. Congratulations!

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:03:42 2011 No.2703013

>>2703006
Don't flatter yourself. No matter how you slice it, that guy is no where near the stupidest in this thread, just because he disagreed with you.

Also, wasting money is wasting money, no matter how much it is. We just need to meet our energy needs as efficiently as possible.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:05:42 2011 No.2703032

>>2702967
>Energy
>Retard

We will always need energy. But do we need money, what use there is for money in a nuclear wasteland or medieval willage?

This type of investment transfrorms money, time and resources into cheap and plentifull energy.

On consumer level money is important because it has to come from somewhere and with money you buy resources add the time and you have something.

In the goverment levels money starts to lack meaning, you can make more of it and get more of it and use it as you will. Because goverment can change taxation and laws it essentially lacks the restriction of money.

Resources and time are concrete things that are there and no matter how much money you trow at them there are finite time and finite resources.

Resources like metals are plentifull but things like oil are not. Oil runs out while metals get recycled. Time is also a resource that we might not have too much.

We need more energy before our existing supplies run out. This can be arranged if we build solar power because the resources are there and time is still there but money is not. We must act before the time runs out and that is why goverments should take controll of this situation.

Also having acces to basically unlimited and free source of energy brings in huge benefits not only to the people but to the financial sector too.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:12:42 2011 No.2703067

>>2703032
The production chain of solar panels is one of the most polluting, and they need to be replaced often because their output degrades fast.

And that's not counting all the problems coming from the fact that a few clouded days in a row will completely fuck up entire areas in your plan.

Solar energy is a fucking joke, it will never work for anything major. Thinking it will is delusional wishful thinking and risks to become a drain on money better spent on other projects that might actually work.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:13:42 2011 No.2703076

>>2703032
Energy which is not available at night, energy which we have no real way of storing on a large scale and energy that would require massive amounts of energy to transport assuming they were dumb enough to build superconducting cables with current technology.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:22:42 2011 No.2703138 SOLAR ENERGY BEST CHANCE: Massive solar array in space. Microwave beams directed to earthbased powerplant. ????? ENERGY FROM SPACE!!!

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:23:42 2011 No.2703144 >>2703138 Next thing you know. Necromorphs, necromorphs everywhere~

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:26:42 2011 No.2703164 >>2703138 This would actually be fairly clever, expecially if it is positioned in a way to work as a solar shade as well. Of course, if for some reason you should miss with the beam, it'd fuck shit up big time.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:29:42 2011 No.2703185

>>2703067
Considering that solar power is the ultimate for of power generation in the end it will prevail.
Today it's not advanced enough and that is why goverment investing in it and building infrastructure to support it will help it to stand on its own feet. Also i'm talking about global solution that includes nuclear power in the form of molten salt power and fusion in the future.

You should read my post again. Heavy investments in solar are only the situation that would be ideal or the best in the long run and only for the ideal world. I also included there the part what will hapen or will most likely hapen.

Also i would love to hear your solution to this problem.

>>2703076
To my knwoledge superconducting cables might save energy when used on big scales and when the cables are build well. Storage and distribution is major problem with solat power. Part of it can be countered with the distribution network and multiple places of production, small local plants and thousands of square miles of deserst for the big plants. There are some good storage methods like salt storage but more work needs to be done still.

I think you underestimate our current technology. If we would dot consider money then all kinds of big wonderfull projecst come possible. For example race to the moon with tech that was basically shit. But we made it when US put its mid to it and it became huge pissing contest agaist USSR. If i remember correctly space race drained something like 20% of the budget.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:33:42 2011 No.2703204 >>2703164 Put it on a millisecond oscillator; check for beam alignment first then send a pulse of microwave for one millisecond. If the alignment check fails no pulse is sent.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:36:42 2011 No.2703232

>>2703185
>thousands of square miles of deserst

I guess you are unaware that most of these plants in the US are being blocked due to the environments they ruin. Renewables should be the supplement, they need far too much land and are not reliable enough to be the primary power source.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:45:42 2011 No.2703307

>>2703232
Well that is a problem since US has good deserts to power north america. That is one way goverment should chahge to give out more areas for big construction of solar and nuclear plants. Basically to reserve some areas for these kind of things buy out people that live there and build some nuclear power there and solar in the desert.

I walue that these areas are protected but there must come time when rationality wins and instead of tiny pockets of preserved then some setlemets then some protected areas we should have big areas of protected enviromets then big areas of human setlements and big areas of industiral space. Because even if total land area doesn't change it's better to have couple of big protected areas that many tiny areas.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:50:42 2011 No.2703346 >>2702153 >time oh thats reputable it cant be something untrustworthy like a blog could it oh no no one would cite a blog right guys

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:51:22 2011 No.2703349 >>2703307 I'm not the person you're respond to but... English isn't your main language I assume...? You might want to add in a comma or two so your statements are easier to read. Just sayan

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:56:57 2011 No.2703398

>>2703032
Before we do any such thing we need to upgrade our grid.
Hell even if we stick with the status quo we need to upgrade our grid.
We're wasting 20% of the produced energy on a shitty grid that needs updating.

I don't care too much what way we go, but can we just update the damn grid already? Even if we go 100% nuclear/coal/oil ... wasting so much on the grid is silly.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 16:59:42 2011 No.2703420

>>2702437

The sun will run out, as will the earth/moon system's angular momentum component that causes tides. As will the earth's internal heat.

Solar, Wind, Hydro, geothermal, and tidal power are all not completely renewable. The thing is that they will last for a very long time.

Nuclear power, especially thorium reactors have the potential to generate power for a very long time. It's basically close enough

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 17:01:42 2011 No.2703431 >>2702153 >maximum potential dose anyone might get was less then he or she would receive from a month's exposure to the natural radiation given off from rocks, soil and the sun. derp

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 17:02:42 2011 No.2703438 >>2703307 Typos~ Anyways I'm not the person you're responding to but... English isn't your main language I assume? You might want to add in a comma or two so your statements are easier to read. Just sayan

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 19:18:42 2011 No.2704450

>>2702920
>We still have enough time to deploy massive solar plants and to build the necessary superconductive distribution grid and all other storage and maintanance facilities. After that we should turn our eyes towards fusion and it's possibilities.

Building Solar panels, and the storage facilities needed to make up for the serious flaws wind and solar inherently have will have an immense up front cost that no one wants to pay and that might not even work in the long term.

Nuclear is a far safer, more economical, and more reliable source of energy. As soon as a plant is complete, it can pay for itself. You can't do that with solar. In terms of construction costs, wind turbines produce 1kW at a cost of 24 cents per hour. Nuclear: 3-4 cents per hour.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 21:28:42 2011 No.2705370 >>2702385 MOL TEN SALTS

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 22:56:42 2011 No.2705886 >>2705370 Unproven in the scale suggested. Not worth it.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:10:42 2011 No.2705907

400000 microsieverts detected to have been leaked, containment of #2 failure. That's ~40rem and then leak is just starting.

Time to face reality everyone. You can't plug a radiation leak on a containment structure that large easily or quickly. JAPAN IS FUCKING FINISHED.

Indexer !t1.kaRtHUs Mon Mar 14 23:31:42 2011 No.2705913

>>2703185
>Considering that solar power is the ultimate for of power generation in the end it will prevail.

solar's pretty weak at the moment and the future ain't any brighter. the land required to SUSTAIN individual states with at least a 20% photovoltaic are gargantuan.

IE if we had to do that in italy, we'd have to build photovoltaic panels on more or less the same extension of the entire val d'aosta. and entire region of fucking solar panels.

hell, we could actually put that shit somewhere in the sud but then even then people would steal that shit like it keeps happening routinely.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:33:42 2011 No.2705931

>>2703067
>The production chain of solar panels is one of the most polluting, and they need to be replaced often because their output degrades fast.

Concentrated solar power doesn't use photovoltaic panels, it's an array of mirrors that drive a heat engine. Pretty simple and effective in terms of resources.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:33:42 2011 No.2705932 Oh man, FUCK YOU GUYS who said that nothing bad could happen at these fukushima reactors. 2 of them exploded and the core is exposed you cunts.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:34:42 2011 No.2705933 >>2704450 >Nuclear is a far safer, more economical, and more reliable source of energy. That's what the utility companies want you to believe.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:34:42 2011 No.2705937 The #2 containment structure failed. Now everyone knows why you shouldn't skim on costs when building FUCKING NUKE REACTORS. Thanks, GE. say bye bye, japan. I expect to see >2Sv (lethal) within the day.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:37:00 2011 No.2705949 >>2705932 You should probably go bury yourself now, in case there is nobody around to bury your corpse for you.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:37:42 2011 No.2705945 >>2703307 Do you have any idea why nuclear reactors are not built in the middle of deserts?

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:37:42 2011 No.2705947

HONESTLY people, how bad can this get.. according to the media, it looks like even worst case scenario is just a VERY SMALL radiation leak that will dissipate in a few days and not cause any health problems.. so why so much of a deal? how bad is it really?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:38:42 2011 No.2705955 >>2705913 >>2705931 My mind boggles at how you can fight about solar power while we have a 40rem leak occurring this very fucking instant

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:38:42 2011 No.2705962 >>2705932 You should probably go bury yourself now, in case there is nobody around to bury your corpse for you. Or relax, Chicken Little.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:38:42 2011 No.2705963 >>2705932 What are you talking about? The containment vessel at 2 may be leaking radiation, but the area in danger has been preemptively evacuated. That's the problem right now, and Japan will need to get creative to solve it.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:40:42 2011 No.2705975 >>2705907 >>2705907 >400000 microsieverts Thats .4 siverts, That dosage would not even kill me if all of it was absorbed by my body. You would need 10x that before you were able to fatally dose ONE adult human. Learn 2 radiation

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:40:42 2011 No.2705977 Does ANYONE have sauce for some worst case scenario? or is everyone being sheeple for new media as usual?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:46:42 2011 No.2705988 >>2705977 Best case scenario, The Radiation takes out Fox News.

>>	Indexer !t1.kaRtHUs Mon Mar 14 23:46:42 2011 No.2705990 >>2705977 the worst case scenario is a meteorite crashing on the reactor. on the other hand, HOLY SHIT RADIATION.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:47:42 2011 No.2705991

>>2705977
Even the worst case scenario for a 40 year old reactor like this is a meltdown. And plants are designed so that if a meltdown occurs the molten core is spread out by the containment vessel floors.

SO worst case scenario (barring another cataclysmic event like an earthquake or a meteor shower) would be that the core is salvageable, the cleanup costs millions. But even then 'containment' would not be breached.

Heres a video of a F4 phantom being flown into a containment wall at flight speed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR0f8n10DR4

These things are practically invincible

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:47:42 2011 No.2705999

>>2705947
If there is a leak, there will be very little that can be done to stop it. Radiation levels will just increase to the point where that no one would be able to man the water pumps safely.

Low levels of nuclear reactions can continue happening for years leaking shitload of nuclear material overtime, by the time they cover the plant hundreds of miles of area would be exposed and many inhabitable. Even if the exposure is only 0.5sv per a day, you cannot live there for any period of time. Radiation exists for while, best case scenario is that it was only cesium that is leaking which has a half-life of 30 years.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:49:42 2011 No.2706010

>>2705975
>You would need 10x that before you were able to fatally dose ONE adult human.
You say that like it would dose the one human, and then be fully expended.

If you had radiation in that sort of quantity, you could fatally dose numerous humans. It's not all absorbed or whatever you're thinking by one human and that's it.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:51:42 2011 No.2706014 >>2705990 Worst case scenario is a COMET landing on the reactor. A comet full of space dragons.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:52:42 2011 No.2706022 I'M SCARED

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:52:42 2011 No.2706023 >If there is a leak, there will be very little that can be done to stop it. Radiation levels will just increase to the point where that no one would be able to man the water pumps safely. This is happening right now btw

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:52:42 2011 No.2706025 Reactor 2 containment damaged, radiation 8 mSv and rising.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:52:42 2011 No.2706028 >>2705977 http://mitnse.com/ worst case scenario still hasnt changed, and they still arent at worst case scenario - still another 3 or 4 layers of containment for that.

Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:55:42 2011 No.2706032

>>2705947
If there is a leak, there will be very little that can be done to stop it. Radiation levels will just increase to the point where that no one would be able to man the water pumps safely.

Low levels of nuclear reactions can continue happening for years leaking shitload of nuclear material overtime, by the time they cover the plant hundreds of miles of area would be exposed and many inhabitable. Even if the exposure is only 0.5sv per a day, you cannot live there for any period of time. Radiation exists for while, best case scenario is that it was only cesium that is leaking which has a half-life of 30 years.

>>2705975
That's how much you will get every hour if standing next to the plant, but if there is a leak the amount will only rise. Over 1 sv is pretty bad, get 6-8sv and you only have a 50% chance of living even with medical aid.

Basically 20-30 hours near that plant you will die at this point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_poisoning#Exposure_levels

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:56:42 2011 No.2706038 >>2706022 You should be on your knees thanking god that this happened. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UmotTE-VlY

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 14 23:57:42 2011 No.2706041 >>2706010 Exactly, it spreads out away from the reactor. But imagine it did not spread out because I am ontop of the leak inhaling all the dust. EVEN THEN I WOULD BE FINE.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 15 00:18:42 2011 No.2706048 >>2706038 Poe's Law if I ever saw it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 15 00:20:42 2011 No.2706055 >>2704450 >Nuclear is a far safer, more economical, and more reliable source of energy. That's what the utility companies want you to believe. With some more research, solar power will be the next generation power source.

>>	t-shirt !pants1bKj2 Tue Mar 15 00:21:42 2011 No.2706065 http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-japan-reactor-damage-20110314,0,5884491.story http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2011-03-15-1Aquake15_ST_N.htm

Anonymous Tue Mar 15 00:22:42 2011 No.2706068

>>2703067
>The production chain of solar panels is one of the most polluting, and they need to be replaced often because their output degrades fast.

Concentrated solar power doesn't use photovoltaic panels, it's an array of mirrors that drive a heat engine, usually a steam turbine. Pretty simple and effective in terms of resources. You keep conflating solar with pv, that's stupid.

Anonymous Tue Mar 15 00:26:42 2011 No.2706092

>>2706025
As far as I can make out, all the reactors and containment are still intact. The increase in radiation is not from core exposure to environment (OP picture is suffering from bad translation - they meant the fuel rods aren't submerged in water anymore), but what appears to be a criticality accident from reactor 4's spent fuel storage.

So. The reactors are safe. Instead we're looking at radiation from outside the reactors.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 15 00:27:42 2011 No.2706102 >>2706068 But the mirrors need to be constantly cleaned and eventually they need to be replaced due to scratches caused by sandstorms.

Anonymous Tue Mar 15 00:28:42 2011 No.2706105

>>2706092
According to this ( >>2705896 ) anon, the Japanese PM & Chief Cabinet Secretary held a press release in which they stated there was an observable hole in the #2 reactor.
I can't confirm because I've neither saw that press release nor do I speak moon runes, but that sounds like a secondary containment breach to me.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 15 00:35:42 2011 No.2706153 >>2706055 Would I rather pay 88 cents per kWh, or 8. Maybe we should let the consumers vote with their wallets and not with their letters.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 15 01:26:42 2011 No.2706476 Read this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/nuclear-experts-weigh-in-on-ge-containment-system/201 1/03/14/ABspN1V_story.html Sounds like your typical money-before-safety case to me.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math