Ban nuclear?

[Aqua Pro Builder]

Now there is a new twist to the already problematic nuclear crisis-the fourth reactor(which no expert is expecting it to be in trouble as it has already been shut down before the quake) is in trouble. They are saying this may be just as bad as the other ones if problem is not resolved quickly. These are spent rods but kept in a pool of water but if the water level is evaporated, which may be already happening now, after the fire broke out.

Another unexpected incident? Come on.

This should be expected and should have been prepared even though may not be able to take care of due to the hardship of the premise after the quake. Nevertheless, did I not mention the simple "what-if" scenario of after shock and another tsunami that water rise and recede-destructing more safety measures and equipment? They were even saying that these spent rods when exposed and caught fire they will be as radioactive as the ones in the core. Why not single expert mentioned that when the first reactor is in trouble and start preparing for the worst? When we overlooked the first one, that indicates we overlooked many. There were so many measures/scenarios can be over looked! Even though I do not expect a scenario that millions will die due to this melt down but we are still too careless in handling dangerous matter, imo.

 

[Aqua Pro Builder]

Everyone, please stay on the topic premise. This is a thread about safety of nuclear technology and how careless(and arrogant) we are in handling dangerous matter such as nuclear energy or nuclear weapons. If we do find that we are too careless or arrogant in handling them, should we consider a ban or much stiffer regulation?

We all(at least most) know the risk and miss handlings of other energy sources, but they belong to another thread which we can spend another week to discuss. We are not talking about clean energy here. All the injections of other info are hijacking the thread and lead us no where to conclude or establish even one point in the topic.

Thanks

 

[Chiefmcfuz]

WOW Wingo because people don't agree with you, you tell everyone to stay on topic? You started this thread and people responded with valuable agreement and opposition. Just answer me this. How many times have you been in a nuclear facility? Toured the grounds the control centers and reactors? How many reactors have you been in?

I bet the answer is no.

 

[lfsmarineguy]

+1 Chief.

Wingo, you can't ignore everyone that has posted a valid, yet opposing view just to keep a thread rolling. You're commenting on and condemning Japan's handling of a situation in which you have no idea of the logistics involved. The level of devestation is so great that I am sure the majority of their infrastructure is useless and getting the coolant where it needs to be is made that much more difficult, let alone getting the equipment in to fight the fires. Not to mention that the reactor facility is just one of Japan's problems right now. I'm sure it's a priority but you can't begin to imagine how thin their resources must be spread right now.

I'm not sure what the goal of this thread is any more but I think your focus is on the wrong aspects of the situation.

 

[Aqua Pro Builder]

WOW Wingo because people don't agree with you, you tell everyone to stay on topic? You started this thread and people responded with valuable agreement and opposition. Just answer me this. How many times have you been in a nuclear facility? Toured the grounds the control centers and reactors? How many reactors have you been in?

I bet the answer is no.

I do think other people's opinions are valuable but some did drift away from the topic. These are valuable in the topic of "what is a better clean energy."

Sorry your assumption is wrong, I worked in a DOE nuclear research lab before.

 

[Aqua Pro Builder]

+1 Chief.

Wingo, you can't ignore everyone that has posted a valid, yet opposing view just to keep a thread rolling.
...

I did not ignore other people's valid point just that they belong to a separate topic. They belong to clean energy not safety of nuclear technology.

but you can't begin to imagine how thin their resources must be spread right now.

I stated the same as you in my post too as, "may not be able to take care of due to the hardship of the premise after the quake"

 

[lfsmarineguy]

I do think other people's opinions are not valuable

busted.....

 

[Aqua Pro Builder]

I am sure you guys thought my post #42 is rude, and please accept my bluntness but that's how a proper debate can get an answer, we narrow down the topic, hopefully find a conclusion to that narrow point. Then, we extend it the next narrow point which is some what related. Once again we, hopefully, find an answer to that point before we expand further.

For example, I started a topic of the uses of copper to treat fish diseases, but other members introduce the idea of keeping up with water change can save more fish even though TRUE and VALID, but is still off topic. The TRUE and VALID of water change does not invalidate the TRUE and VALIDITY of that copper can treat fish diseases. The reverse is true too-the TRUE and VALIDITY of copper can treat fish diseases does not invalidate the TRUE and VALID of water change can save more fish.

 

[Aqua Pro Builder]

busted.....

it's typo during editing,
should have read, "I do think other people's opinions are valuable"

 

[lfsmarineguy]

typo or Freudian slip?

 

[Aqua Pro Builder]

typo or Freudian slip?

sure not Freudian slip

It was typed correctly originally but during editing I added the "not" in the wrong place. It happened you find the wrong time to read the post. If you read couple seconds earlier or couple seconds after, it will reflect what I actually mean.

I do have trouble reading my text when in editing mode. I cannot read very well with white background - I guess, my eyesight is going. I also notice my thoughts sometimes jump around and hard to follow. Please pardon me on that.

 

[Aqua Pro Builder]

These just come in around noon MAR 16th from quotes in Yahoo News:
-Japan's nuclear crisis appeared to be spinning out of control on Wednesday
-"People would not be in immediate danger if they went outside with these levels. I want people to understand this," Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano told a televised news conference, referring to people living outside a 30-km (18-mile) exclusion zone. Some 140,000 people inside the zone have been told to stay indoors.
-The situation at No. 4 reactor, where the fire broke out, was "not so good," the plant operator added, while water was being poured into reactors No. 5 and 6, indicating the entire six-reactor facility was now at risk of overheating.
-"It could become a serious problem in a few days," he said.
-"This is a slow-moving nightmare," said Dr Thomas Neff, a physicist and uranium-industry analyst at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The European Union's energy chief, Guenther Oettinger, told the European Parliament that the plant was "effectively out of control" after breakdowns in the facility's cooling system.
-CHINA SUSPENDS NUCLEAR PLANS
-Russia ordered checks at nuclear facilities on Tuesday.
-RADIATION IN TOKYO NOT A THREAT TO HUMAN HEALTH

The full text can be read in the link.

 

[Wes]

Since the topic is simply "Ban Nuclear?" nothing that has been discussed thus far has been off topic.

Especially the opposing views that statistically point to Nuclear being the safest, cleanest, most efficient way of producing electricity.

 

[beerfish]

Sorry your assumption is wrong, I worked in a DOE nuclear research lab before.

So that's not dye in your hair? :tongue:

 

[Aqua Pro Builder]

Since the topic is simply "Ban Nuclear?"...

That's a good point. The title does not hit the topic properly even though I try to specify the criteria in the 1st post.

 

[Aqua Pro Builder]

So that's not dye in your hair? :tongue:

Should have done that. The color of my hair may be radio active, beware. :tongue:

 

[Aqua Pro Builder]

Even though the following views touch on energy only, not the technology as weapon also, the two opposing views in nuclear power can offer some more insights to issue,

1)Why Nuclear power is a necessity

2)How vulerable are U.S. nuclear plants?


So far, it looks like most experts and politician are sayings, "We will continue to develop nuclear technology while admitting that current safety measures are not enough." Therefore, I assume the general consensus is that we should put much more regulations in the technology. Just a reminder, most of their talks have never put nuclear technology as a weapon in prospective yet. We are still scratching the surface of issue of nuclear safety.

 

[Chiefmcfuz]

So wingo you have been in actual Nuclear Power plant Control rooms? Reactors? On an actual nuclear power plant facility? I am not talking about som lab I am talking about the actual power plant.

 

[Aqua Pro Builder]

So wingo you have been in actual Nuclear Power plant Control rooms? Reactors? On an actual nuclear power plant facility? I am not talking about som lab I am talking about the actual power plant.

Not in an actual nuclear power plant control room. It's a Department of Energy atomic energy lab that research on top notched nuclear stuff such as nuclear power, super conductor, non proliferation and national security. It does have small nuclear reactor and one of the most advanced nuclear accelerator and simulators for studying the most advanced nuclear physics and technology. I think France made or is still making a more advanced one afterward. The lab produced 7 Nobel prize winners thus far I think.

 

[Chiefmcfuz]

Ok so the answer to my question is NO, please stay on topic.

Someone please contact Jesse Ventura and introduce him to wingnut here. I am sure the two of them can work up a theory on how to get this done.