On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:33:19 PM UTC, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Ghibbsa, > > I tend to agree, if nuclear reactors are just built to the high safety > standards they need to be. Quite obviously they should be built to > automatically shut down safely, rather than having melt downs. > > In general the aggregate risks of nuclear power are less than comparable > amounts of other energy sources and there is enough of it to last ~250 > years. > > 2. Also I think the solution to nuclear waste is pretty simple. One just > encases it in lead within cement and drops it into oceanic subduction zones > where it will be drawn down into the mantle, melted, dissolved and > massively diluted. > > 3. Remember Nagasaki and Hiroshima were nuked not that long ago and yet > people now live there quite happily and > There's been major flooding in the UK the last 2/3 months, and a fantasy that popped up for me was....the technology has advanced a lot. There was a time only the Icelanders could tap geothermals g economically. That is, engineering a mechanical arrangement involving,basically, bore holes down to near the depth of the rocky crust. Not too far to dig down in Iceland. But still, if the engineering was a plan to admire, it'd be infinite energy, effectively. Admittedly as stated there's a lot of scope left in there for impossibility in practice. Nice fantasy though. That said, had better.
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 5:02:10 PM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote: > >> On Thursday, February 13, 2014 3:01:26 PM UTC, cdemorsella wrote: >>> >>> Ground water contamination levels at the sampled well site of 54,000Bq/ >>> liter >>> >>> NHK <http://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/english/news/20140213_22.html>, >>> Feb. 13, 2014: *Record cesium level in Fukushima plant groundwater* — >>> [Tepco] says water samples taken from a newly-dug well contained the >>> highest levels of radioactive cesium detected so far in groundwater at the >>> site [...] the record levels suggest that the leakage point could be near >>> the well. [...] 600 times the government standard for radioactive >>> wastewater that can be released into the sea. It is more than 30,000 times >>> the level of cesium 137 found in water samples taken from another >>> observation well to the north last week. [...] [Tepco has] yet to determine >>> where the leak originates. >>> >> In general the dangers arsing from nuclear fission power are grossly >> exaggerated. It's far and away the best answer to greenhouse emissions, >> that is also realistic. If we'd been building nuclear power stations the >> fracking locomotive wouldn't be the unstoppable force that it has become. >> on >> Many ways the dangers are blown out of proportion.. Even catastrophic >> meltdown that blow the roof off and spread the love like Chernobyl, do not >> result in a tiny fraction of the disasters that the standard models >> predict. Ten's of thousands were predicted to die. In the end, just 40 >> deaths from Chernobyl, and most of those the people sent in to get control >> in the aftermath. >> >> There have been revolutions in station design since plants like fukishima >> were built, and that disaster isn't shaping up to the dire predictions >> either. >> >> What most of all this derives out of, are long standing questions about >> the level of risk associated with exposure to radiation at low doses up to >> somewhere below the 200 mark. There's no firm evidence of substantial risk. >> There's plenty of evidence for genetic protection. There's a whole plethora >> of statistics we could reasonably expect if low dose exposure was anything >> like the risk that still sits there in the model. Airline cabin crew should >> have higher frequency cancer for all that time so near space for one >> example. They don't. >> >> Conversely there are some major natural radiation hotspots in the world. >> You'd expect those areas to produce more cancer and radiation poisoning >> related disease. But the opposite is true. People exposed to dramatically >> higher doses of radiation (inside the low dosage spectrum), actually become >> lower risks. There seems to be a triggerable genetic response when levels >> increase. >> >> I'm over-compensating in the other direction a bit here. Not because I >> love the bomb, but if you only knew the power of the dark side. >> >> >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
