Nuclear Idiocy

[Anonymous No.2709290]

I think this latest pathetic outburst by the media and public showcases why some things are too important to take the opinion of the general public into consideration. The Japanese plant incident proves conclusively how safe nuclear power is, a 40 year old plant took an earthquake far more powerful than it was designed for and a tsunami and has still not gone into meltdown yet ignorant fools everywhere are calling for nuclear to be banned. Its as if they actually want us to rely on fossil fuel for power despite claiming to care about the environment and human health.

[EK !EKFQOBUFnQ No.2709298]

>most people are morons.

so whats new?

[Anonymous No.2709305]

Too bad that 20km of evacuated land will probably never be used again. Valuable land that housed thousands of people.

[Anonymous No.2709317]

If anything this should've sparked a movement to modernize or replace all of the older nuclear plants with modern plants. But it won't.

[Anonymous No.2709322]

>Germany has temporarily shut down seven of its nuclear power plants while it reconsiders its nuclear strategy.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-12745899

[Anonymous No.2709325]

The thing that gets me is no major news outlet bothers to explain anything behind the words they're using. They throw around "meltdown" without explaining what it means. Nobody's said anything about what kind of containment these plants use. They all say "radiation x times above normal" but never put that into context. What's normal? How much is dangerous?

It's just bullshit. Just a giant black MELTDOWN headline.

[Anonymous No.2709326]

Coal kills more people every year than nuclear power has ever killed.

[Anonymous No.2709338]

>>2709325
Dangerous short-term levels are about 300 times normal background levels.

Normal background varies, but is 2-3 mSv/yr. A 1000 mSv short-term dose would give you radiation sickness symptoms, and 100 mSv/yr long-term (not just for a little while) significantly raises cancer risks.

[Anonymous No.2709339]

>>2709322
For three months. Because in that period are some elections mrs Merkel wants to win. Then the plants go back online.

[Anonymous No.2709350]

>>2709322
>>2709339
This bullshit needs to end as well. The entire system of science and major global problems being ignored because politicians have to pander to the public.

[Anonymous No.2709357]

>>2709322
Because the german citizen are brainwashed by green peace.

70% of all germans are convinced that a similar accident like in Japan will happen here in germany

[Anonymous No.2709359]

>>2709338
Whoops, fucked that up. You need 300 times a normal YEARLY dose in a short term exposure (let's say an hour) to get radiation sickness.

So that's more like 2 MILLION times normal background for an hour.

[Anonymous No.2709362]

>>2709339
She could just throw some cleavage on a campaign billboard instead

[‮‬ !.OPIsFAG5Y No.2709378]

>>2709359

It's just tiring, media starts throwing around absolute Sv numbers that should be Sv/h and vice versa. Or just quoting brief highs (like the 8k µSv) as if they're at a constant level.

Whatever suits their headline or political opinion best.

[Anonymous No.2709379]

Meanwhile: actual environmental catastrophes related to fossil fuels that are given no attention by the media.

[Anonymous No.2709391]

>>2709357
we do have earthquackes in germany

[Anonymous No.2709397]

>>2709391
The only Earthquakes you have are when the fat guy at the bar falls because he ate too much schnitzel.

[Anonymous No.2709398]

>>2709379
It's funny, I'm trying to find the latest about the extent of the damage the massive earthquake and tsunami caused, and instead every article I see is MELTDOWN IN JAPAN: UP TO A DOZEN PEOPLE MAY HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO RADIATION 1000X ABOVE NORMAL, MELTDOWN ALL OVER THE PLACE SHIT'S TOTALLY OUT OF CONTROL, RADIATION EVERYWHERE! WE DIDN'T LISTEN! WE DIDN'T LISTEN!!!

[Anonymous No.2709399]

>>2709391
Magnitude 9?
And a tsunami?
In Germany?

[Anonymous No.2709405]

>>2709398
Which is really aggravating, since you need a few MILLION times normal background for an hour to have health problems.

[Anonymous No.2709408]

Well the water in the spent fuel pool of reactor 4 is evaporating and the heat of the fuel is increasing. There was an explosion and fire there today. It is now partially exposed. If that shit combusts, you better hope the wind is blowing away from you.

[Anonymous No.2709411]

The sad thing is that even an absolute worst case scenario would cause fewer deaths than coal does globally in a year, probably less than coal causes every month but it gets so much coverage.

[Anonymous No.2709413]

>>2709399
Rheingraben.

It'll budge one day.

[Anonymous No.2709416]

>>2709379
A Oil refinery is burning? Com'on we have already seen that plenty of times. It is getting stale.

[Anonymous No.2709421]

>>2709290
>why some things are too important to take the opinion of the general public into consideration

In general, scientists dont give a shit about what the publci says. The public is fucking retarded and often refuses to believe fucking facts.

[Anonymous No.2709422]

>>2709339
>>2709362
Are there even any viable alternatives to the CDU in this regard? Does *any* German party take an explicit pro-nuclear stance?

[Anonymous No.2709425]

>>2709357
Are there any fucking fault lines IN Germany?

[Anonymous No.2709427]

>>2709421
Which is why things like nuclear power should not be based on public opinion, ideally politicians should be excluded as well. The people who actually know what they are talking about should make these decisions.

[Anonymous No.2709433]

>>2709427
The problem remains that they are still built by the lowest bidder.

[Anonymous No.2709437]

>>2709421
Alot of the "general public" still believe in god.
LMFAO.

Why would you expect reason, and intellegence, from people who believe fairytales are real.

[Anonymous No.2709440]

>>2709433
By nature the plants are safe, as long as they are being built and completely replacing coal in a power generating role things are going in the right direction. Besides if qualified people were in charge they would probably be more willing to pay more for quality.

[Anonymous No.2709442]

>>2709437
I believe in God. Debate me, lowly atheist.

[Anonymous No.2709446]

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,750810,00.html

>The nuclear disaster in Fukushima makes it hard to ignore the vulnurabilities of the technology. It could spell the end of nuclear power, German commentators argue on Monday. The government in Berlin may now cave in to mounting pressure to suspend its 12-year extension of reactor lifetimes, they say.

Looks like it's back to coal and gas for us. Super.

[Anonymous No.2709447]

>>2709427
Yes, you are 100% correct.

[Anonymous No.2709449]

>>2709437
>>2709442
No.

Shut the fuck up. Both of you.

[Anonymous No.2709451]

>>2709422
No.
CDU are the conversatives of germany and yet the are considered liberal from US viewpoint.

All other partys are far left.

[Anonymous No.2709453]

>>2709442
>I believe in God

You still believe in Santa Clause too?

[Anonymous No.2709460]

>>2709413
Yeah, and Yellowstone will blow up again some millienium and fuck up the world.

It just might taken hundreds of thousands of years.

[Anonymous No.2709461]

>>2709451
Man, everyone's a liberal when they're compared to US politicians.

[Anonymous No.2709464]

>>2709449
>believes in God

[Anonymous No.2709467]

>>2709449
Just as expectations. Lowly atheists are unable to face up to the challenge when it arrives, yet still talk shit.
Come at me. Any of you atheistsitic pigs, just come right fucking at me.

[Anonymous No.2709470]

>>2709453
>Asks for a debate
>Gets laughed at without explanation
typical atheist

[Anonymous No.2709472]

Dammit, anybody stupid and immoral enough to want coal over nuclear should be banned from politics. Nuclear is safer and would heavily reduce Europes reliance on Coal imports and Russian gas.

[Anonymous No.2709477]

>>2709470
>>2709467
>>2709464
>>2709453
shut up and take your stupid argument to /b/ where it belongs.

[Anonymous No.2709481]

>>2709461
Yes, the natural progression of politics is always to go to the Left. The "right" is always goona lose in the long run.

The right = old ways, what old people want
The left = change, what young people want

The old will always lose (as they die before the young...lol).

[Anonymous No.2709482]

>>2709472
Big part of the problem is nobody understands that there's more than one type of nuclear reactor. Not the public, not the politicians, probably not even the journalists reporting on this mess.

There are reactor designs out there that -can't- meltdown, even if every other system in the plant fails these reactors just sit there at an idle temperature. Where's the press coverage about these possibilities? Nowhere.

[Anonymous No.2709483]

>>2709472
>Dammit, anybody stupid and immoral enough to want coal over nuclear should be banned from politics.

That would be hard, since coal>nuclear is the public opinion.

[Anonymous No.2709493]

>>2709472
I know that some company was developing paint that is able to generate electricity. That's what I would want. Paint the roof of every building in a city, no more need to construct power plants. Wonder what ever happened to that project.

[Anonymous No.2709497]

nuclear = radiation, zombies, n mutations n shit
coal = what you use when u have a cookout in the backyard
now which one seems safer?
that's what i thought asshat libs

[Anonymous No.2709502]

>>2709467
>believes in God

WOW, JUST WOW.
Why would anyone want to debate you?

Do you debate a little kid who beleive in the easter bunny? Nope. You just hope they fucking grow up one day, and then you walk away laughing.

[Anonymous No.2709507]

Reality:

News agency exagerate reality to sell fear. Thats their business.

Foreign analysis of a nuclear technical failure through obscure - unspecific and potentially untruthful secondary sources. I.E. TEPCO updates. Not accurate or correct. There is a continual cascade of problems that is being released to the public that none of the posters on this forum who claim it's safe have been able to predict. We just don't have enough information as to the true state of the reactors.

[Anonymous No.2709512]

>>2709497
0/10

[Anonymous No.2709520]

Can someone confirm if the wikipedia numbers for Sv are accurate?

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

According to those it'd take 250mSv-3Sv/day of direct exposure just for people to be getting ill.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12749444

According to this the rates were up to 9.6Sv/day but are falling

[Anonymous No.2709521]

>>2709322
WHAT

I literally cried "WHAT" out loud when I read that article. I'm flabbergasted. Germany hasn't even suffered any disaster (Much less a 9.0 followed by a tsunami and lack of power), and they're shutting down the plants for no fucking reason?!? This is pure insanity. There's zero cost/benefit analysis.

If I were Merkel, I'd shut all the nuclear plants down and see how Germany likes its blackouts.

[sage No.2709526]

>>2709497
Cars = constant internal explosions
Bikes = No explosions

Coat plant = FIRES!
Windmill = wind


So, you gonna get rid of your car, and build a windmill?

You trollin?

[Anonymous No.2709534]

>>2709507
FAUX news = the downfall of society

[Anonymous No.2709538]

>>2709521
Don't worry. We will just build more coal plants and import russian gas. That should do the trick.

[Anonymous No.2709548]

As the Gulf Oil spill was overrated,
So will this be.

It sells a lot of Pepsi.

[sage No.2709564]

>>2709538

[Anonymous No.2709570]

>>2709521
The public is simply too stupid for nuclear power, that's all it is. Nobody can be bothered to take 30 minutes out of their day to read a few Wikipedia articles and educate themselves before they form an opinion.

Actually that's probably the crux of most modern problems. If people took the time to educate themselves on topics then maybe the politicians wouldn't have to pander to their ignorance all the time.

[Anonymous No.2709577]

>>2709564
Is this an actual quote?
>mfw this wouldn't even faze me

[Anonymous No.2709581]

At some point you have to realize that when you claim the public is too stupid that means your a fucking dumbass.

[Anonymous No.2709592]

>>2709502
obvious closed minded atheifag detected
get out of here

[Anonymous No.2709598]

>>2709570
Its a sad state of affairs when all people would need is to read wikipedia.

Maybe they should just force all people at school everywhere to spend several hours on nuclear power and why it is safe and won't ruin the world.

[Anonymous No.2709602]

>>2709598
NO
I WON'T LET DA GUBBERMINT BRAINWASH MY KIDS
WHAT DOES OPRAH HAVE TO SAY ABOUT DIS?

[Anonymous No.2709604]

>>2709581
>your

Go away.

[Anonymous No.2709605]

>>2709598

30 minutes of wikipedia = several hours of studying.

[Anonymous No.2709609]

>>2709581
In this situation the public is being objectively ignorant and is holding back progress. Or are you arguing politicians, sensationalist journalists and the general public know more than educated people, scientists and nuclear engineers?

[Anonymous No.2709616]

Here's a fun experiment for everyone. Ask around, see how many people you know who are over 30 bothered to read a single paragraph about nuclear power recently that didn't come from media articles.

[Anonymous No.2709622]

>>2709605
Yes wikipedia can help you learn a lot quickly but a one or two hour class would do absolute wonders to help this situation.

>>2709602
Ah yes the same people who causes disease outbreaks by refusing to let their children be vaccinated.

[Anonymous No.2709632]

>>2709622
JENNY MCCARTHY SAYS VACCINES WILL GIVE MY KIDS AUTISM
THOUSANDS OF MOTHERS OF AUTISTIC KIDS CAN'T BE WRONG

Also I think water shouldn't be fluoridated because flourine is a poison.

[Anonymous No.2709637]

As german it absolutely baffles my mind how ignorant most of my fellow countrymen are.

We learn a lot about power plants and especially nuclear power plants in school.

[Anonymous No.2709679]

>>2709637

it surprises me, too. Most of the germans I have known have been very rational people, yet on this subject it seems they have been too thoroughly green peaced to form an opinion of their own.

[Anonymous No.2709685]

>>2709616
My uncle works in nuclear power and is telling the rest of the family various information about it. Though I'm sure he's as information starved as we are.

[Anonymous No.2709698]

>>2709679
by judging the validity from the worst case scenario, which is a much more catastrophic event than a exploding coal plant of oil refinery

[Anonymous No.2709699]

A challenger appears

[Anonymous No.2709722]

>>2709698

that is like shutting down LHC because it "might cause black holes"

full retard, brah.

[Anonymous No.2709724]

>>2709698
Deepwater Horizon called and you're fucking retarded.

[Anonymous No.2709742]

>>2709699
Inefficient

[Anonymous No.2709743]

>>2709699
Sure, lets replace 55 nuclear reactors with ~100 000 wind plants, and while at it upgrade the electric grid for fifty billion USD so it doesn't black out instantly from the fucked up variable load that wind would impose.

[Anonymous No.2709754]

>>2709743

[Anonymous No.2709764]

>>2709743
It's better than humanity living in a radioactive hell hole after 1000 years.

[Anonymous No.2709777]

>>2709764
WW3 is a more likely cause of that than reactors.

Should do something about that insane desire to blow people up for no reason what so ever.

[Anonymous No.2709782]

>>2709743
Wind farms aren't the only renewable resource.

And you buy fruit don't you? Fruit availability is based on weather patterns. Just oranges are more expensive season than the last doesn't mean you should drink a high fructose corn syrup instead.

[Anonymous No.2709798]

>>2709564
No way that's an actual quote...is it?

[Anonymous No.2709800]

>>2709782

yes, but he can opt to not eat oranges and it won't plunge his city into the chaos and misery that follow most blackouts. where exactly are you going with this? not being able to predict the weather sucks? yes, he already said that.

[Anonymous No.2709819]

>>2709777
Any sort of war would turn Earth into a radioactive wasteland if we predominantly use nuclear energy, even an economic downturn! 1000 years from now humanity might be a lot worse off than we are today for any number of reasons. We might not always have the capacity to keep that shit safely contained.

And do you think the power companies intend on keeping their nuclear waste contained over the course of the next 10,000 years? When you take the cost of doing so into account renewables are practically free by comparison.

[‮‬ !.OPIsFAG5Y No.2709857]

>>2709819

>implying waste would stay at half-life periods of thousands of years if it wasn't for the greens blocking development

[Anonymous No.2709860]

>>2709819

actually if you hippy types would allow the new technology to be implemented breeder reactors could make use of that "radioactive waste" as fuel, kind of eliminating the need to go and bury the usable material in some remote mountain location. Also, newer technology is generally safer technology.

There is very little righteous on the side against nuclear power. The renewables are nowhere near being viable right now, not to mention shit like solar panels, as has already been mentioned like 80 times on this forum alone, only yield for about 30 years and then you are left with a useless solar panel with toxic material that you have to dispose of.

[Anonymous No.2709864]

[Anonymous No.2709935]

>>2709864
What are the rates for that though, exposure isn't a matter of absolute values.

[Anonymous No.2709960]

This just in from CNN's twitter
>U.S. Navy: Radiation after Japan #quake creates "one of the most challenging humanitarian operations." http://on.cnn.com/g8J1WO

>Kyodo News: Part of crew forced to abandon control room of #quake damaged nuclear plant due to radiation. http://on.cnn.com/hM2Dtg

[Anonymous No.2709972]

>>2709935
exactly
it says that 0.1 is an x-ray
so how long can I take an x-ray without it becoming bad?
this seem like short term exposure values.

and what the fuck man, so many units for radiation

[Anonymous No.2709977]

>>2709857
>implying nuclear energy is more cost effective when one factors in the cost of breeder reactors and containment
>implying there aren't defense risks that go along with breeder reactors

[Anonymous No.2709984]

>>2709977
you know how much energy you get from one nuclear reactor?
and how much you get from the same size solar farm?

[Anonymous No.2709991]

>>2709864
>Background radiation in parts of Iran, India and Europe: 50 mSv/year

Sauce: BBC

[Anonymous No.2709994]

>>2709977
>implying they are costly
>implying all the breeder reactors couldn't be in the nuclear states

[Anonymous No.2709995]

>>2709322

They shut down the 7 oldest reactors in Germany, which, as decided by the previous government, were to be shut down beginning of 2010 anyway.
But as the current government is obviously getting paid (also) from the nuclear industry lobbyists, they reversed the the policy of shutdown and let them on the net for a further 10 years.
Now that there is this catastrophe in Japan, they turn around by 180° and shut down these reactors. Shows that they were unsafe because too old, in the first place.

Also, to all you pro-nuclears: what are we going to do with all the nuclear waste?
>>2709860 this argument does not stand, since when do anti-nuclear-energy hippies/greens have anything to say in politics anyway? Im sure these parties are supporting R&D on no-waste nuclear plants, everything else would be retarded (except those getting paid by the eco-lobby, which do exist too, sadly).

[Anonymous No.2710022]

>>2709995
>what are we going to do with all the nuclear waste?

There's several reactor designs that re-use spent fuel on site, over and over again until there's barely anything left. Molten Salt Reactors for instance can be built to produce 0.1% of the waste that a standard reactor does, and they're much safer to boot.

[Anonymous No.2710052]

>>2709995
Have you even read the artivle beyond the headline?

They take the reactors offline in order to do a security check. If everything is fine they will go online again.

[Anonymous No.2710056]

>>2709995
Modern reactors (generation IV) solve pretty much all problems

Has nuclear waste actually killed anybody?
If not, what is wrong with the way we currently handle it?

[Anonymous No.2710071]

>>2710056
It takes up alot of land, valuable space.

Solution:

Fire it into space, dump it on other planets.

[Anonymous No.2710076]

>>2710071
You can't be serious

[Anonymous No.2710081]

>>2710071

launch it into the sun.

[Anonymous No.2710090]

>>2710076


I don't see why not.

[Anonymous No.2710103]

>>2710056

The Gen IV thorium fuel cycle reactors create waste that lasts a couple generations rather than hundreds of thousands of years, so waste would not even be the issue it is now.

>>2710071

Don't need to. Modern breeder reactors can take what we currently consider waste and reuse it as fuel.

>>2710090

One of the launch vehicles fails and scatters concentrated nuclear waste all over the globe. Now what?

[Anonymous No.2710104]

>>2710071
Implying that the space used is meaningful
Implying that is not my final solution.
Good to hear from another person that doesn't see nuclear waste as a serious issue
Are you the person i responded?

Space is one way to go and another would be to use neutrons and change the radioactive elements to something not so radioactive.

[Anonymous No.2710115]

>>2710052
I live in Germany and get bombarded with this shit 24/7 for the past few days. Im sick and tired of the news coverage, the self absorbness of the germans only talking about their fucking reactors while shit is hitting the fan in Japan, but most of all Im sick of our greedy fucking two faced politicians, changing their minds like other people change underwear.
THus this "security check" is a big excuse, the issues have been known for nearly 10 years now (when the went online in the mid-70s, they were to be shut down by 2000), as another anon pointed out, theyre only gonna go offline for 3 months because our ubercunt Merkel's got some elections to win.

>>2710056
I have indeed heard of them. But what are the costs of these? Are they readily usable yet, or still in the development phase? Whatever happened to nuclear fusion reactors?
And are Uranium, Plutonium etc not fossil, thus essentially finite ressources aswell?

[Anonymous No.2710124]

>>2710103
Space elevator will handle the transportation to space until then, we either reuse it or just store it in some warehouse or dump it somewhere, maybe to sahara or inside some mountain.

[Anonymous No.2710130]

>>2710115
>Are they readily usable yet, or still in the development phase?

We could build them right now, if we were permitted to.

>Whatever happened to nuclear fusion reactors?

Still in development.

>And are Uranium, Plutonium etc not fossil, thus essentially finite ressources aswell?

Yes. If we were to derive all of our power from thorium fuel, we would only have enough reasonably available to us to last maybe one billion years (as in nine zeroes) at present consumption.

[Anonymous No.2710138]

>>2710124
Can't you just connect your elevator to orbital solar collectors?

[Anonymous No.2710141]

>>2709984
Space has never been an issue. I drove past 4 wind farms over the weekend. All of them were in the middle of farm fields.

[Anonymous No.2710145]

>>2710124

Well as long as we're using science fantasy solutions, why not just use a matter teleportation device to beam it up there?

[Anonymous No.2710158]

>>2710115
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_IV_reactor

Fusion is in development but it won't be ready in time to fill the oil gap.

While we wait for fusion and solar power to mature we must create enough energy and nuclear power is better alternative than coal to replace oil in a decade or two. This is because we must also consider what are the effects of energy sources. Coal will seriously damage the enviroment while nuclear is both clean and safe.

Nuclear fission wont last forever but lets hope that it gives us enough time to get fusion and solar going.

[Anonymous No.2710163]

>>2710141
And solar farms are on the rooves of buildings.
Keep dreaming.

[Anonymous No.2710171]

>>2710145
Did you even read what i said? We store the usedc fuel in earth untill it's safe to trow it to sun. You(or someone) complained about the delivery. Then i presented that we will then wait untill we have space elevator to transport it safely. Any other safe solution works too

[Anonymous No.2710178]

>>2710115
> but most of all Im sick of our greedy fucking two faced politicians, changing their minds like other people change underwear.

You see, this is a fault of democracy.

Of course this is only an excuse, but she had to react in a way to calm the public, because 70% think that a same accident will happen in germany.

What is her other option? Shutting down all reactor immediately like the public demands? They seem to think that electricity comes out of the power outlet.

[Anonymous No.2710181]

My favorite so far is on CNN where they had someone explain the dangers of nuclear reactors. He stood up and with a chart he showed how dangerous these nuclear power plants are and how the US shouldn't be building more, then admitted that none of the new reactors in the US are built this way, they can auto shut down with no supervision whatsoever, but ANYWAY, they're very dangerous because look what's wrong in Japan!

[Anonymous No.2710207]

>>2710178


the fault is not with democracy itself, per se. the fault lies with educators doing a poor job of informing the people about the realities of nuclear technology. the fact that there are unreasonable greens doesn't help matters as they only muddy up the water more, but the fact that the scientific community hasn't been more vocal about fighting them is the cause of the current pile of shit that is the debate on nuclear power.

[Anonymous No.2710216]

To those who sound like they know what they're talking about, what good books are there about this stuff? I could use one, unless there's something better online that isn't Wikipedia.

[Anonymous No.2710218]

>>2710181
The BBC earlier today had a neat little slide show that explained the situation. It had red and blue colors and arrows, and little cartoon pictures of control rods that moved up and down. I think maybe they ripped it from The Magic School Bus or something.

[Anonymous No.2710228]

>>2710216
I guess everything that wasn't published by Green Peace should be fine.

[Anonymous No.2710233]

>>2710207
I don't know how it is in Germany, but in America people are inherently distrustful of scientists in a similar fashion to bankers and politicians.

If someone thinks you're lying or hiding something, you have very little chance of showing them otherwise.

[Anonymous No.2710234]

>>2710216
Why not start with Wikipedia? The nuclear power articles go into a lot of detail.

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

[Anonymous No.2710241]

>>2710216
Google helps. Wikipedia is a great place to start and there are the links to other places at the bottom of the articles. That should make you busy for couple of days.

[Anonymous No.2710252]

>>2710233
It's not like that at all here. Most politicians have degrees, many have PhD's. Professors and such get a lot of respect usually.

[Anonymous No.2710258]

>>2710233
>in America people are inherently distrustful of scientists in a similar fashion to bankers and politicians

well fuck, that explains quite a fucking lot.
goddamn americans why must you be so ignorant

[Anonymous No.2710289]

>>2710233
Their Chancellor, Angela Merkel has a PhD in Physics

[Anonymous No.2710296]

>>2710141
Do you know how much space it takes for a wind farm to produce 1,000MW of electricity? Guess how many nuclear reactors can do that.


largest wind farm in US
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roscoe_Wind_Farm
400 square kilometers / 100,000 acres, 780MW.

Average Power Plant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_Canyon_Power_Plant
750 Acres / 1,100MW. Each.

[Anonymous No.2710298]

>>2710216
start with Wikipedia, click lots of links in articles, read click lots of links in the articles you just clicked to

weeks of reading material there, you'll be busy for a while if you give it an honest shot

[Anonymous No.2710299]

>>2710178

democracy is only as faulty as the people that elect and are elected into power.

She shoudve never made the deal with the energy industry, knowing that those reactors were way past their use-by-date (lol). no one here claiims to shut down all these power plants at once (although some people dream about it), but why not shut them down, gradually. enable smart power grids to adequately handle the demand for power and slowly increase the part of renewable energy in our energy mix.

[Anonymous No.2710300]

>>2710258


the people who are distrustful are the same people that buy into creationism, to a large extent anyways.

How are they to trust someone who they have been decrying for decades? Nevermind that that person has made it their business to be informed about the subject at hand, rather than spouting broscience.

[Anonymous No.2710301]

>>2710258
I probably made it worse than it sounds. It's not that the public is distrustful of science. It's when politics mixes with science they are distrustful of.

On the extreme, you have people who think scientists are idiots corrupting nature and people who think the goal of science is to disprove God.

[Anonymous No.2710345]

>>2710296
To be fair Wind Farms are a retarded idea, wind and solar power are much better utilized built into the city design than in the middle of a field.

Distributed power generation will be a major part of the future.

Though I'm not arguing against you, for the time being nuclear all the way.

[Anonymous No.2710375]

>>2709742
not to mention they murder birds

[Anonymous No.2710379]

>>2710296
>Diablo Canyon is designed to withstand a 7.5 magnitude earthquake from four faults, including the nearby San Andreas and Hosgri faults.
Including related tsunamis?

[Anonymous No.2710389]

>>2710299
>no one here claiims to shut down all these power plants at once
Last time I checked Spiegel Online it was over 50% of the citizen.

The usability of renewable energy in germany is mostly exhausted. I'm not in the energy sector myself but a friend of mine is and he told that he sees little to no future for it.

By 2020 20% of the energy demand should be covered by renewable energy which is not likely to happen

[Anonymous No.2710403]

The way I understand it they had two choices here. One, they could have given up on cooling altogether, let the cores melt down and nothing further would have happened. The cores and containment shells would have to be scrapped after, and this would have been an expensive, messy job, but nothing would have been released into the environment.

Or two, they could try to cool the cores to keep them from melting down. Even though the seawater would also wreck the cores, they'd be a lot easier to clean up and dispose of, and you avoid having to test the containment shell with a meltdown. They should stand up to it, it's what they're designed to do, but why take the chance if you don't have to? As a bonus the fuel rods could be recovered too. Downside is there'd be pressure buildup that has to be released, and the chance of hydrogen explosions outside the pressure vessel.

Obviously they went with option two, but point is even a complete meltdown wouldn't have been such a big deal.

[Anonymous No.2710405]

>>2710379
It seems fairly elevated, but I can't speak to that. Anyways tsunamis don't generally follow San Andreas fault events.

[Anonymous No.2710429]

>>2710403
The reactor didn't have a core catcher. The only thing that would have stopped the meltdown is the solid stone fundament.

[Anonymous No.2710441]

>>2710181
>they're very dangerous because look what's wrong in Japan!
We don't even know what exactly is wrong. The cooling failed but it was supposed to be restored days ago.

[Anonymous No.2710443]

>>2710234
>>2710241
>>2710298

I guess I'll check Wikipedia then, I typically distrust it for the obvious reasons but I'll give it a go. I prefer actual books personally, I'd rather not stare at a monitor any longer than needed, which is why I didn't mention Googling.

Thanks though, my first thought was to read up on the different types of reactors and how they work. So I'll be starting there.

[Anonymous No.2710449]

>>2710389
I have to correct myself. He was only refering to wind farms.

[Anonymous No.2710455]

>>2710379
Tsunamis are created when plates move up and down, eg. one plate is pushed under another. In San Andreas the plates are moving sideways.

[Anonymous No.2710468]

>>2710429
Well that's pretty fucked. I thought it was pretty much standard for reactors after Chernobyl. I guess that explains why they chose option 2 then.

[Anonymous No.2710475]

>>2710468
>after Chernobyl

Fukushima was built in the 70s.

[Anonymous No.2710479]

>>2710468
The reactor was build before Chernobyl

[Anonymous No.2710496]

>>2710475
But no doubt they've added safety features since then, kind of like how planes are retrofitted after air disasters bring some new flaw to light.

[Anonymous No.2710503]

>built before chernobyl
>withstood 9.0 earthquake
>no disaster, but some problems

>NUCLEAR IS BAD AND DANGEROUS AND NUCLEAR NUCLEAR NUCLEAR

[Anonymous No.2710516]

I read the thread but I don't think I found an answer, what is the worst that could happen to Japan? Is it possible that the reactors explode and do something like Chernobyl?
Because the media here(France) don't say much appart that "it's dangerous!! it's going to explode!', so if you could help me to see a bit more truth.

[‮‬ !.OPIsFAG5Y No.2710518]

>>2710496

Nobody really knows, but all nuclear plants in Japan are built on very concrete layers of stone as well as far as I know.

[Anonymous No.2710521]

>>2710516
If they knew what would happen they would have tried to prevent it.

[Anonymous No.2710523]

>>2710468
Yfw you realize that reactor older than Chernobyl survives one of the worst earthquakes ever and a huge tsunami after that is left standing.

>Someone implying that nuclear reactors are weak

[Anonymous No.2710535]

Question:

Is the worst over in Fukushima 1, 2, 3?

How much longer do they need to cool?

You think the partial melted cores have 'crusted'?

[Anonymous No.2710548]

>>2710443
Wikipedia is a good place to start and get a general idea about things. Once you find something really interesting you usually can read more bu following wikipedias links and googling. By then you usually have some books that you could also read.

Starting from wiki is also good because it helps to limits the areas you want/need to read. If you'r completely new to nuclear reactors and stuff there is so much writen about them so it's bet to get general understanding first.

[Anonymous No.2710549]

Just got back from a class in which I argued with 2 friends of mine for the whole hour.

They first said that their previous teacher told them the reactos had melted down and much of Japan would become irradiated, and the US would get some too. Then, one of then compared it to Chernobyl (this got me boiling). After trying to explain the differences to them, one just kept whispering chernobyl over and over again.

Why are people so stupid?

[Anonymous No.2710556]

>>2710516
Oh don't listen to the french media.
They're actually lying. They're trying to insist that the incidents count as a 6 on the scale rather than a 4.
And it's a logarithmic scale- three mile island scored 5.
Basically, French media outlets have been paid by someone to say that this incident was 10 times worse than three mile island.

Which is obviously not true.

But seriously, someone is definitely funding nuclear scare stories in France- it's fucking appalling.
If you want some more accurate information, use wikipedia. They're pretty good at this- however if there's something that seems a bit off, like 'confirmed cases of radiation poisoning', check the sources.
Well maybe not if you know nothing about radiation, but you get the idea.

[Anonymous No.2710557]

>>2710296
You can build houses and farm the land around these turbines, though. That's a positive about turbines and solar panels. While they may take up a large total area in theory, the area is still widely usable.

I'm pro nuclear power, but I thought I'd throw this point out.

[Anonymous No.2710559]

>>2710549
Because world media is saying the same thing.

Wallstreet need to short japanese stocks for this whole week. Then they will invest in them once prices come down.

Boom Bust capitalism.

[Anonymous No.2710562]

>>2710535
Fukushima 3 has completely vanished in a puff of nuclear smoke. All evidence of its existence was wiped out by a nuclear blast.
Fukushima 2 is doing relatively well.

[Anonymous No.2710564]

>>2710535
>How much longer do they need to cool?
According to Tepco the already cooled down this morning.

[Anonymous No.2710569]

>>2710559
Which also pisses me off, saying that this accident is just below Chernobyl is fucking insane, but that doesn't stop the French!

[Anonymous No.2710575]

>>2710535
Probably. Some problems could happen if there is some serious undetected damage to the cores. But they are working on it and as long as water is flowing everything is ok.

The cores take some serious time because the fuel continues to create heat even after shutting the plant down. Depending on the amount of cooling that they can use it takes couple of days to go to no risk zone.

The cores are damaged beyond repair but they were going to shut them down anyway so it doesn't matter.

[Anonymous No.2710577]

>Its as if they actually want us to rely on fossil fuel for power

Who do you think pays the media? BIG OIL

[Anonymous No.2710581]

>mfw anyone talks about this to me unless they agree with my face

[Anonymous No.2710584]

>>2710548

Thanks for the advice, appreciate it.

[Anonymous No.2710586]

>>2710455
>Tsunamis are created when plates move up and down, eg. one plate is pushed under another. In San Andreas the plates are moving sideways.
This. Plus the San Andreas is mostly over land, which makes it hard to generate tsunamis. The Cascadia fault north of the San Andreas is the one to watch for as it is underwater and is the same type of fault as the Indonesia one.

>>2710296
Wind is inefficient, and should be a supplemental power source. Also I'm an ecofag and this shit about nuclear=bad and hurr durr wind and solar only pisses me off. Thorium reactors are exponentially safer than uranium, yet they are banned in the USA (I really hate this place).
Also what about wave or tidal power plants?
What about solar towers? http://money.cnn.com/2006/08/01/technology/towerofpower0802.biz2/
What about geothermal power that Nevada has a shitload of?
What about the old tried and true hydro power? Honestly, fuck the fish. Adapt or die. Or even the newer side-hydros that operate like the old grist mills with the wheels on the side of the rivers?

There's plenty of options, and I didn't even touch on the space-solar/microwave idea or the various biomass technologies.

[Anonymous No.2710587]

>>2710577
The real question is, are envirotards that retarded, or are they on someone's payroll?

[Anonymous No.2710588]

>>2710535
They are all melting. Even Reactor 4 which was already shut off is melting. Reactor 5 and 6 will probably melt as well.

[Anonymous No.2710592]

>>2710557
You underestimed the acoustics stress of wind farms.
Nobody wants to live near them even if you paid them for it

[Anonymous No.2710599]

>disregard nuclear
>acquire shitty future

[Anonymous No.2710604]

Repost:
Situation update as Fukushima Daiichi as I can best make out based on reliable sources (Official sources, IAEA, NEI, etc), not mainstream media:
Sea water injections are continuing at reactors 1, 2, and 3. Fuel is about 50% exposed at reactors 1 and 3, and #2 is "Recovering after dried up" after apparently running out of water twice already.
Fuel integrity of #1 and #3 confirmed damaged, unknown status for #2.
Fire at #4 put out. Cause still unknown, but speculation of lube oil burning.
Rumors of operator error/damaged vents that prevented pressure-released inside the vessels and seawater-injection.
Unit 2 possible containment integrity breach.
Peak radiation at the plant was measured at 400 millisievert.

[Anonymous No.2710614]

>>2710604
>speculation of lube oil burning

So it caught on fire because some fucking faggot engineer left his fucking sextoys around? Goddamn engineers!

[Anonymous No.2710616]

>>2710586
>Thorium reactors are exponentially safer than uranium, yet they are banned in the USA
Is Big Uranium behind that?

[Anonymous No.2710640]

>>2710586
To my knowlege wind turbines, especially the small ones, that aren't placed in optimal places actually cost more oil to make/use than they save during their operation time. (someone has any info on this)

>Honestly, fuck the fish. Adapt or die
>Fish, adapt
>Generate the ability to fly in one generation
>Mfw they do that

Seriously i do agree that we need more water power but the fish should be also accounted for. That is an easy proses afterall.

We need more nuclear to replace oil and coal, and to give time for the fusion and solar powers to become working solution. Also we need more time to get our infrastructure to allow mass transit to solar power.

[Anonymous No.2710642]

>>2710604
Any Isotops besides cesium and iod leaked?

[Anonymous No.2710655]

>>2710616
no. the nuclear regulatory committee is behind that because they HAVE NOT APPROVED A SINGLE FUCKING NEW DESIGN IN 35(THIRTY FUCKING FIVE) YEARS

[Anonymous No.2710660]

>>2710614
It's Japan. Nothing out of the ordinary to see here.

>>2710616
I'm sure there is some retarded reasoning behind it. Fuck, for all I know, it could be because thorium is named after the god Thor and 'we Muricuns don't none believe in no gods other than jeezus!'

[Anonymous No.2710666]

Come on you idiots, radiation is leaking everywhere from these plants and you still deny nothing can happen?

We are fucked, just admit it.

[Anonymous No.2710672]

Thorium Molten Salt breeder reactors are the way to go.

They operate at atmospheric pressure, so they cant explode.

They are thermally self limiting, i.e. if they get too hot, the reaction slows down because neutrons get moving too fast and cant be absorbed, thus they cant overheat because the reaction stops after a certain temperature.

They require 1/4th the land area to construct for the same amount of power generated.

No expensive containment required, they are passively safe.

They recycle old spent fuel rods and other radioactive material and turn it into material with a half life of less than 100 years.

Nuclear is the future.

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

Read if you don't believe.

[Anonymous No.2710675]

>>2710666
Radiation is also leaking from your body and from the screens of the computer you're using right now. You use the word, but I don't think you know what it means.

[Anonymous No.2710676]

>>2710640
>the fish should be also accounted for
OK, and unlike most ecofags, I actually gave a concrete solution to the problem by suggesting the side-river turbines. What about the other ideas I threw out? Any opinions on any of those?

[Anonymous No.2710678]

>>2710666
Define "fucked". With numbers.

[GayEmoBetch !.pCLIFaWNg No.2710679]

>>2710660
Occurrence?

[Anonymous No.2710680]

>>2710616
They are. Any generation IV reactor is safer than the old designs

For exapample molten salt reactors basically cannot explode.

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

Read the part about advantages and disadvantages if you are on a hurry.

[Anonymous No.2710681]

>>2710672
Something has do by fishy about them.

As far as I read they seem to be the holy grail of engery supply, yet nobody even considers using them.

Can somebody explain why?

[Anonymous No.2710683]

>>2710557
Apart from being unreliable and taking up large amounts of land wind turbines can cause severe negative health affects in certain people. And their effects on wildlife are not fully known.

>>2710586
>Honestly, fuck the fish. Adapt or die.
>adapt to a complete blocking of their natural habitat

Idiot

[Anonymous No.2710687]

>>2710666
Come on you idiot, radiation is leaking everywhere from the bedrock and space and you still claim something can live on this planet?

We don't exist, just admit it.

[Anonymous No.2710688]

>>2710672

Damn you got him first

>>2710680

[Anonymous No.2710689]

>>2710666
Alpha particles can't kill you unless you let them into your body.

[Anonymous No.2710691]

I remember using my geiger to show some idiotic anti-nuclear bitch that bananas are radioactive, along with hazelnuts and other food. I was actually hoping to prove that a little radioactivity is not dangerous, but I managed to scare her shitless that she doesn't eat any of those any longer.

I may have failed in my demonstration, but lots of fun was had.

Anyway, this should be proof of how retarded the average person is. HOLY FUCK I'VE BEEN EATING NUKES ALL MY LIFE I'M GOING TO DIE!

[Anonymous No.2710692]

3 were already down for maintenance.

[MacDaddychucknorrisCockLoverBoy No.2710693]

Even if they do meltdown its not going to be as bad as everyone says. I'm not a nuclear physicist but even I'm smart enough to understand how fallout works, which apparently the media doesn't understand. The shit has a half life or a window of time where its a problem. This bound to end up in the Pacific even if it does meltdown, trace amounts might end up in LA or some shit but only for a few weeks will that be a problem. That been said a fire or a major one at least is what could change this whole event. The control rods were fully interested at the time and even if the reactor/s do melt down they weren't crucial during that time of the quake. The energy levels at the time were pretty low at the time too. Something like 10% I don't know though I could be wrong, but I "know" the fuckers at CNN BBC and FOX news don't fully understand the situation or how nuclear reactors even work and they aren't screaming and running for the bunkers, so fuck it. I'm ready for the nasty comments on m opinion too, so come at me oh wise and intelligent /g/nome.

[Anonymous No.2710696]

>>2710675

Fucked as in massive amounts of radiation was detected 100 miles off the coast of Japan last Friday.

Fucked as in we haven't had any new news since 1am Sunday.

Fucked as they're getting everyone in Japan ready for the worst possible scenario.

Fucked as in if this melts down it'll go right trough the earth.

One can only hope this isn't fatal. Fact is this should be a testament that green energy is the way to go, Nuclear plants aren't going to be built until were long gone after this incident.

[Anonymous No.2710698]

I've now learned everyone on CNN and Fox News are the same.

Retards who love jesus or retards who hate jesus.

[Anonymous No.2710700]

>>2710691
Oh wow.

[Anonymous No.2710701]

>>2710698
Also MSNBC is liberal, but...but out of ALL US cable news.

Rachel Maddow was the least alarmist.

[Anonymous No.2710703]

>>2710681
India is actually leading the world in Thorium reactors, they have one going fully online this year. For some bizarre reason they are not in widespread use elsewhere.

[Anonymous No.2710704]

>>2710696
Reported for trolling.

And you should do the same.

[Anonymous No.2710706]

>>2710691
Totally buying a geiger counter.
If it's to get anti-nuclear idiots to stop eating food, it's worth the price.
Also it gets you tons of pussy. It's like having a dog- bitches eat up guys with geiger counters.

[Anonymous No.2710710]

>>2710696
> massive amounts of radiation was detected 100 miles off the coast of Japan last Friday.
lolno
I said "with numbers", faggot.

>Fucked as in if this melts down it'll go right trough the earth.
China syndrome is not possible here. It's even more impossible than a Chernobyl scenario.

[Anonymous No.2710711]

>>2710696
>massive amounts of radiation was detected 100 miles off the coast of Japan last Friday.

They found elevated levels of radiation 60 miles off the cost. I take it the rest of your post is hyperbole(or hyperbull) and stopped reading right there.

[Anonymous No.2710713]

>>2710691
>HOLY FUCK I'VE BEEN EATING NUKES ALL MY LIFE I'M GOING TO DIE!
>mfw background radiation over the span of 70+ years is the whole reason people die from old age to begin with.

[Anonymous No.2710721]

>>2710642
Not that I know of.

[Anonymous No.2710725]

In the late 1880s, when electrical lighting was just beginning to hit the mainstream, people were fucking TERRIFIED of these newfangled electrical things. Why? Part because it's new, part because electricity had been portrayed as some wild, almost magical, unpredictable mystery element (see Frankenstein).

Fears of being electrocuted were so common, daring individuals were actually hired to PUSH THE LIGHT SWITCHES in large mansions and buildings, so the owners, homeowners, working staff, etc wouldn't have to risk a bolt of electricity from magically jumping through the switch and frying them, or worse, turning them into some kind of subhuman monster.

Same deal here. Public just hasn't moved past the 1950's "radioactivity is the new magic, holocausts and spiderman" phase, and ignorance plus fear equals pitchforks.

[Anonymous No.2710726]

>>2710713
This is false.

[Anonymous No.2710730]

>>2710706
>go on ebay
>Ukrainian Geiger counter
WHY DO I WANT THIS SO MUCH

[Anonymous No.2710731]

>>2710696

>a reading of 0.6 millisieverts (mSv) per hour was made at the plant's main gate, the International Atomic Energy Agency said.

Oh noes! Run for the fucking hills!

[Anonymous No.2710734]

>>2710730
Because you've enjoying playing the Stalker games?

[Anonymous No.2710735]

>>2710706
So how soon will it be before Fallout 4: Japan comes out?

[Anonymous No.2710737]

>>2710731
A whole 0.6 mSv? WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!

[Anonymous No.2710738]

My face when countries are shutting down nuclear reactors all over the world.

I was afraid this day would come. We depend on nuclear power in our every day lives, and now they are taking it away. Stupid protesters.

[Anonymous No.2710740]

>>2710676
Yes that is what is was talking about too. It's easy to protect both the interests of man and nature. By just leaving a way for the fish to bypass the power genrators we protect them. There is need to protect the nature, but no need to overprotect. Making stupid laws that actually damage the nature like nuclear power bans is really stupid.

Im basically agreeing with you here. It's better to have more variety in power generation so the system is more stable to sudden changes. Nuclear is the main way to go untill solar and fusion are ready to be used properly. But we need those other forms too. Tidal and water in general is good and wind is not so good but can be effective in some areas. Solar should be used in cities but in no major way. Just to make the cities more self sufficient and clean.

[Anonymous No.2710741]

>>2710735
>another shitty Fallout game with the same damn engine
>now with tentacle monsters
No thanks.

[Anonymous No.2710745]

>>2709427
This applies to a lot more things than just nuclear power, and is almost never the case. It can't be helped, may as well get used to it.

[Anonymous No.2710761]

>>2710713
>>2710713
>mfw background radiation over the span of 70+ years is the whole reason people die from old age to begin with.

that statement is so retarded you just gave me cancer

[Anonymous No.2710762]

>>2710730
>live at east coast
>buy geiger-müller counter
>manipulate the counter so it always displays a high radiance
>troll passersby

[‮‬ !.OPIsFAG5Y No.2710767]

>>2710762

I like that idea

[Anonymous No.2710770]

>>2710735
Never. You should know enough to know that the Fallout series is based on twisted physics.

[Anonymous No.2710772]

>>2710725
Except that you can be electrocuted.

Nuclear power can be dangerous and it's right to take appropriate safety measures.

You guys are talking like it would be fine to plant rose beds with spent fuel from a nuclear plant.

People also are right to be worried and reassess after a disaster like this.

Espically when so called experts KEEP going on TV saying nothing bad will happen, it's safe. then the next day it KEEPS getting worse they are right to be suspicious.

Why do people who consider themselves 'smart' also become so fucking annoyingly arrogant.

I really understand why people hate nerds after comming to /sci/ for 10 mins.

[Anonymous No.2710775]

>>2710735
I don't know, but when it does happen Big Willie Johnson is going to make his IRL debut.

Pic very related.

[Anonymous No.2710776]

>>2710713
9/10

Excellent trolling, would rage again.

[Anonymous No.2710780]

>>2710761
>>2710726

>mfw: trollface

Jesus, you guys are easy to troll. Relax, bros.

[Anonymous No.2710782]

>>2710762
You don't need to manipulate the counter, just turn the thing on and start picking up background radiation. It's the look on your face that shows people how serious it is, not the clicking.
For bonus points, wear a sharp suit and sunglasses, or a lab coat.
Just scan shit that's near people and they'll freak the fuck out.

"Nothing to worry about maam."

[Anonymous No.2710784]

>>2710772
>safety measures
>HOLY SHIT A NUCLEAR REACTOR SURVIVES A 9.0 AND HASN'T MELTED DOWN
>SHUT THEM DOWWWN

Because that's what's going on right now.

[Anonymous No.2710786]

>>2710772
>>2710772

Because we people who consider ourselves "smart" realize that certain other people who consider themselves "smart" are actually annoyingly stupid and have no factual basis for their reasoning.

[Anonymous No.2710792]

>>2710784
Maybe in the trash press you read, do you read it so you can feel superior?

[Anonymous No.2710796]

>>2710786
Such arrogance must be a sign of youth and immaturity.

[Anonymous No.2710800]

>>2710792
>implying that's not exactly what's happening in Germany right now
>implying fucktard Obama isn't considering nuking our nuclear power

[Anonymous No.2710803]

>>2710792
It's what they're saying in the French media.

So yes, shit tier media.

Also this may surprise you, but the Daily Mail (British newspaper, you may have heard of them, think of them as fox news in newspaper format) actually published a story downplaying the seriousness of the nuclear things and that it's not worth worrying about, and reiterating that it's much safer than people may think.

[Anonymous No.2710807]

>>2710784
A 10.0 earthquake could happen at any time. And that's ten times stronger.
Or maybe it just rains for a while. Or maybe both.

[Anonymous No.2710808]

>>2710772


it really hasn't gotten much worse. there have been no breaches of the containment vessels and all of the terrifying explosions have been hydrogen explosions. No significant radiation has leaked, in spite of what the media is saying. Also this whole " it's okay to step back and reassess" tack is fully retarded because even if this plant were to go into full meltdown it wouldn't be a condemnation of present nuclear technology as the plant is 41 FUCKING YEARS OLD!

[Anonymous No.2710809]

>>2710803
>Also this may surprise you, but the Daily Mail (British newspaper, you may have heard of them, think of them as fox news in newspaper format) actually published a story downplaying the seriousness of the nuclear things and that it's not worth worrying about, and reiterating that it's much safer than people may think.
OK, there has been a lot of stupid trolling lately about Signs of the Apocalypse.

But that is just spooky.

[Anonymous No.2710811]

>>2710772
You do realize that if you are seriously worried about nuclear disasters in modern power plants then you probably shouldn't leave you bunker often. Because basically anything can kill you out there. Meteors and shit can hapen.

[Anonymous No.2710814]

>>2710803
>Also this may surprise you, but the Daily Mail (British newspaper, you may have heard of them, think of them as fox news in newspaper format) actually published a story downplaying the seriousness of the nuclear things and that it's not worth worrying about, and reiterating that it's much safer than people may think.

Bullshit, I won't believe it until I see it.

[Anonymous No.2710819]

>>2710807
The highest recorded earthquake was 9.4

[Anonymous No.2710823]

>>2710807
There hasn't ever been a recorded 10.0 earthquake.

[Anonymous No.2710827]

>>2710807
Yeah, and Yellowstone could blow up at any time, and fuck the entire world.

I'd much rather be killed by something man-made than fucking nature.

[‮‬ !.OPIsFAG5Y No.2710829]

>>2710807

>A 10.0 earthquake could happen at any time

Excellent trolling indeed

[Anonymous No.2710831]

>>2710811
There are dogs too. Some of them aren't even tame.

[Anonymous No.2710835]

>>2710827
see
>>2710806
>>2710815

[Anonymous No.2710840]

>>2710823
>>2710819
>recorded

That doesn't mean it never happened. We never recorded a large meteor strike, but know they've happened in the past. What kind of earthquake magnitudes did they generate? Nobody knows.

[Anonymous No.2710847]

>>2710819
Have you noted that around that time (1960) there were several strong earthquakes. And the next 40 years were relatively silent. And now we have had 4 massive earthquakes in less than 10 years.
Just because the 10.0 never happened doesn't mean it will never happen. Japan also never experienced a 9.0 before.

[Anonymous No.2710852]

>>2710840
Tunguska event counts as a large meteor strike if you subscribe to that view.

[Anonymous No.2710853]

>>2710840
There are historical large asteroid strikes that have been calculated to exceed 10 on the Richter scale, though that's not the same as recording it first-hand.

So what?

This just in: We are neither immortal nor omnipotent, and the universe doesn't care whether we live or die.

[Anonymous No.2710864]

>>2710840
Yeah, a huge meteor struck the Earth, the entire atmosphere is now blackened by dust and we are all going to starve to death because food production will fail.

And you worry about nuclear plants that might be damaged by the earthquakes such an impact would produce.

It's like being on fire and worrying about your best shirt getting ruined.

[Anonymous No.2710865]

>>2710847
It can't be helped. We're not God, we can't control earthquakes with a wave of our hands. All we can do is pray they don't happen.

I should know, I live on the Ring of Fire.

[Anonymous No.2710868]

If we have a 10.0 earthquake, we will have many greater problems to worry about than a few nuclear meltdowns.

[Anonymous No.2710873]

What the hell meteor srikes or earhqukes have to do with anything anyway?

If meteor or earthquake hits major city the damage will be much bigger than one nuclear plant exploding.

[Anonymous No.2710879]

>>2710865
>God
>pray
Shitstorm incoming.

[Anonymous No.2710881]

>>2710873
Apparently we should tear down every nuclear plant ever and replace it with coal or pixie dust just because of the possibility a comet might fart in its face.

[Anonymous No.2710882]

>>2710873
>>2710868
>>2710864
WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT NOTHING IS WORSE THAN NUKULAR!

[Anonymous No.2710883]

>>2710873
You can rebuild after such an event. If the entire nuclear fuel gets released into the atmosphere, you are fucked unless you wait a few trillion years.

[Anonymous No.2710884]

>>2710879
Do you suffer from autism? It's a figure of speech. I'm as atheist as you are.

[Anonymous No.2710886]

>>2710847
>Have you noted that around that time (1960) there were several strong earthquakes. And the next 40 years were relatively silent. And now we have had 4 massive earthquakes in less than 10 years.
What fucking bullshit. Of the top 10 deadliest quakes of the 20th century, 4 of them were in your "relatively silent" period.
http://history1900s.about.com/od/horribledisasters/a/deadlyquakes.htm

And there wasn't a "silent period" recently either. Look at the "major events in 21st century" table.
http://www.mapreport.com/subtopics/d/e.html

[Anonymous No.2710893]

>>2710883
0/10

[Anonymous No.2710896]

>>2710883
You are so fucking retarded it hurts.

Fallout is only dangerous when heavily concentrated, if it were to disperse everywhere, nothing would happen.

[Anonymous No.2710900]

>>2710886
See, there are enormous earthquakes all the time, we should definitely close down the plants.

[Anonymous No.2710905]

>>2710900
9/10

[Anonymous No.2710908]

>>2710883
10/10

Excellent trolling.

[Anonymous No.2710912]

>>2710900
>mfw when I should be raging, but I feel strangely calm instead

[Anonymous No.2710913]

>ITT: people who don't know shit about nuclear energy and waste but insist that it's bad anyways

[Anonymous No.2710914]

>>2710896
nice theory you have there because I dont think anyone has tested it yet.

[Anonymous No.2710915]

>>2710900
No, we definately need to build more, just not on earth.

Mars and Moon are almost dead geologically.

[Anonymous No.2710916]

>>2710884
>I'm as atheist as you are.
I sincerely doubt that.

[Anonymous No.2710918]

>>2710913
No, they're trolls. Learn the difference, it could save your life.

[Anonymous No.2710920]

>>2710913
It is bad because it's to fucking expensive.

[Anonymous No.2710922]

>>2710918
Has anyone been trolled to death?

[Anonymous No.2710923]

>>2710916
Go back to /b/.

[Anonymous No.2710927]

>>2710918
but unless I'm mistaken, trolls are supposed to make other people look stupid and not the other way around

[Anonymous No.2710928]

I would post statistics saying that this is one out of (insert number) of nuclear plants that is having a problem, but google will be filled with shit about this one reactor if I even think about putting japan and nuclear into the search together to find out how many there are...

[Anonymous No.2710932]

>>2710928
Source or you're a liar.

[Anonymous No.2710935]

>>2710927
No, they're generally just supposed to make people rage. How it's done it up to them.

[Anonymous No.2710942]

>>2710922
No idea. You could, in theory, get really upset and pop a blood vessel in your brain.

[Anonymous No.2710949]

>>2710928
IIRC japan has(had?) 55 power-production nuclear plants.

[Anonymous No.2710951]

>>2710928
Not really. Second link in google.
http://www.japannuclear.com/nuclearpower/program/location.html

[Anonymous No.2710955]

>>2710914
It's basic logic, you retard.

Lots of radionuclides in one place: lots of activity.
Same number of radionuclides spread all over the globe: no change at all in the background radiation

[Anonymous No.2710961]

>>2710949
Seems I was wrong, listed are 63 reactors in all.

[Anonymous No.2710984]

>>2710949
Okay then, one out of 55 nuclear plants in Japan has a problem, and even then it's only because of an earthquake...

[Anonymous No.2710990]

>Thorium reactors are exponentially safer than uranium, yet they are banned in the USA.

facepalm.jpg

India will be leading the way here. India has far greater reserves of thorium than uranium, which is why they are leading the way in this technology.

[Anonymous No.2711011]

Anyone know what they're going to have to do to get the situation at Fukushima under control? Like remove the fuel rods or something?

[Anonymous No.2711026]

>>2710681
>why is no one building them?

Because there's a negative stigma to nuclear energy, even to supposedly "clean" implementations.

Furthermore no one is really harvesting Thorium on a massive scale. At least not one large enough to sustain a reactor. The first one built is going to take literally YEARS to make for the simple reason that no one has ever done it before.

It's far too much of a risk for investors.

[Anonymous No.2711031]

>>2711011
>remove fuel rods
>fuel rods no longer underwater
>fuel rods heat up faster
Not sure if troll.
Or just stupid.

[Anonymous No.2711047]

>>2710961
63 total, 55 online.
(or at least, they WERE online..)

[Anonymous No.2711064]

>>2711026
>years

India has one going fully online this year.

[Anonymous No.2711066]

>>2711031
>throw them in the sea
>fuel rods now cold

Yay, cooling!

[Anonymous No.2711072]

>>2710886
Death toll and magnitude aren't directly related.
The 1964 earthquake in Alaska (9.2) killed just 150 people.

[Anonymous No.2711074]

>>2711031

The fuel rods generate so much heat because they're all next to each other with moderators inside a reactor core. They won't just spontaneously melt if they're separated from each other.

[Anonymous No.2711081]

>>2711072
>Implying population density in Alaska is comparable to Japan.

[Anonymous No.2711082]

Honestly, what's the worst that could happen?
Can the fuel rods melt and combine into a critical mass and destroy the rest of the plant and city in a nuclear blast?

[Anonymous No.2711083]

>Mfw waching news in finland.
>There are protests going in the capital city
>STOP NUCLEAR POWER!
>Green party would rather import russian nuclear/coal power instead of making safe and green energy in Finland
Finland is currently building one new reactor and that will make our count to be 5. That plant is semi modern gen 3 reactor with output of 1600 MW so pretty good one.

These people just make me sick.

[Anonymous No.2711097]

>>2711081
That's not my point. The 10.0 earthquake could happen anywhere on the Pacific ring of fire.
It might even end up killing nobody at all.

[Anonymous No.2711182]

>>2711031
>>2711066
The fuel rods are dangerous. Why would anybody remove them from containment right now?

[Anonymous No.2711245]

>>2711066
>throw them in the sea
>fuel rods now cold

<---- 'sup, bitch?

[Anonymous No.2711333]

so, nuclear engineering degrees.

good investment for the future or are they done with?

[Anonymous No.2711845]

>>2711333
You're better off getting one for hazardous waste removal.

[Anonymous No.2711942]

>>2711333

I'm still considering going for one myself, always found it to be the most interesting topic we touched on while reviewing the broader engineering topics.

I could see myself being happy as a plant technician, and I don't see nuclear power disappearing for the simply reason that even the hippies need electricity. (Naturally 'renewable' energy resources need to be developed as well to create a more robust energy system)

[Anonymous No.2711951]

>>2710115
do it like the rest of us:

Embrace once again the Feindsender of the world.

BBC, CNN if you are interested in non scientific but yet balanced coverage, or NHK World if you want real information not retarded eco nut agitprop

[Anonymous No.2712018]

inject liquid nitrogen and smother it in smother it in tones of sand, lead, clay, and boron.

[Anonymous No.2712045]

>>2711951

>CNN if you are interested in non scientific but yet balanced coverage.

>CNN
>balanced

[Anonymous No.2712052]

Nobody does it like Molten Boron!

[снайпер No.2712080]

>>2709338
>and 100 mSv/yr long-term (not just for a little while) significantly raises cancer risks.

Bit late in the thread to be correcting this but, 100mSv/year doses are taken by people ALL OVER THE WORLD.

People live their ENTIRE lives in areas with background radiation above 200mSv/year

They aren't dropping dead from radiation poisoning or cancer. They live normal healthy lives.

[masat01 !FR0hP.YNx. No.2712094]

I've read up on nuclear related material.
I read CNN, Fox, and Independent material.
I study before believing what the news has to say.
I create my own personal opinions.
I believe in God but I'm not batshit insane.
I agree with some views on creationism that go against the default biblical views.
Why are the Atheists mad that I'm a Christian with common sense?

[Anonymous No.2712127]

>>2712094

I ain't even mad

/shrug

[снайпер No.2712199]

>>2710071
Nuclear waste does not take up a lot of space bro.

Even without re-using nuclear waste, we produce so little of it per reactor, that it can all be stored on-site.

[Anonymous No.2713382]

>>2712094

That's very nice, but atheistfags believe that you're not a true Christian and/or going to Hell unless you follow their cartoonish interpretation of the Bible.

[Anonymous No.2714137]

>>2713382
>their cartoonish interpretation of the Bible.
>implying that many Christians don't interpret the Bible this way