U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 10-22-2018, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn, New York
3,712 posts, read 3,824,166 times
Reputation: 3505

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soccernerd View Post
Totally doing away with nuclear is foolish imo. Nuclear power is not as safe or clean as wind or solar of course, but itís way better than coal or natural gas. If we want to be totally reliant on renewables, then we have to develop energy storage. Right now the technology isnít there and it would be incredibly expensive to implement.
This is arguable imo. I believe in terms of fatalities, wind is more dangerous than nuclear. Especially if we go by fatalities per MW generated.

 
Old 10-22-2018, 11:58 AM
 
Location: DC
6,509 posts, read 6,429,279 times
Reputation: 3112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gantz View Post
This is arguable imo. I believe in terms of fatalities, wind is more dangerous than nuclear. Especially if we go by fatalities per MW generated.
You should think this through before you post. It's hard to envision and evacuation zone like we see around Fukushima because someone had a bad "wind spill".
 
Old 10-22-2018, 04:26 PM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
30,638 posts, read 49,287,779 times
Reputation: 19019
Here in the USA we manufacture a couple new nuclear reactors every year, for use on submarines and carriers.

The meme that we do not build any new reactors is false.

Civilian corporations are not building a lot of new reactors for public utilities, but they are building them for the DOD.
 
Old 10-23-2018, 06:57 AM
 
Location: The Driftless Area, WI
2,769 posts, read 1,036,756 times
Reputation: 5940
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCforever View Post
The NRC has made the process as easy as possible.

.

You are obviously completely ignorant of the process. The killer is the inspection process-- excessive paper work and long delays of down time for inspection. That info gained from personal communication with a former construction supervisor of the several plants in IL

Quote:
Originally Posted by fisheye View Post

Like I said before; nobody wants radioactive waste in their back yard. While you claim it is so safe; give us a list of the states fighting for the chance to have it buried on them! It is much easier to find a list of states that do not want the waste buried on them.

!

Purely political. Please give us a list of the nuclear accidents & injuries at waster storage facilities.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Everdeen View Post

You should also understand that waiting for an elevator and sunning yourself is not gamma (very, very bad) radiation, Ö.. You really ought to read up on the electromagnetic spectrum.

Perhaps you should read up on radiation & mutations, not to mention what radiation is in sunlight. Do beaches selectively attract only UV?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoisite View Post

History of Energiewende from the 1970's onwards: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/doss...y-energiewende
.

Or perhaps this one? https://www.cleanenergywire.org/doss...y-energiewende
"For many observers, the energy transition in Germany began with Chancellor Angela Merkle's decision to phase out nuclear power following the accident at the nuclear plant in Fukushima Japan."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gantz View Post
This is arguable imo. I believe in terms of fatalities, wind is more dangerous than nuclear. Especially if we go by fatalities per MW generated.

Please do not confuse the TreeHuggers with facts. Facts rarely fit in well with their wish fulfilling fantasies.
 
Old 10-23-2018, 08:23 AM
 
Location: DC
6,509 posts, read 6,429,279 times
Reputation: 3112
Quote:
Originally Posted by guidoLaMoto View Post
You are obviously completely ignorant of the process. The killer is the inspection process-- excessive paper work and long delays of down time for inspection. That info gained from personal communication with a former construction supervisor of the several plants in IL
.
It's humorous that you would call me ignorant. Want to compare credentials in the subject area?

I was qualified Chief Engineer on US Navy nuclear power plants and have consulted to about 6 civilian nuclear companies, including appearing as an expert witness in regulatory reviews.

The fact that a construction worker finds the quality control rules burdensome is not really a surprise. Hiding construction defects is a long standing issue in building complex plants. We can't afford that in the nuclear environment. The cost of failure is too high.
 
Old 10-23-2018, 08:39 AM
 
Location: Swiftwater, PA
14,284 posts, read 11,631,138 times
Reputation: 10687
Quote:
Originally Posted by guidoLaMoto View Post
Purely political. Please give us a list of the nuclear accidents & injuries at waster storage facilities.
Nothing is political about not wanting something in your back yard that might hurt you or your family. Yes; we have politicians that will use this to get elected. Many times the politicians are simply reiterating the fears and thoughts of public they serve.

Here is the one major accident that happened back in 1979: https://www.newsweek.com/three-mile-...versary-864161. While nobody directly died at the time of the meltdown there is this finding: "a study last year into thyroid cancer cases among people who lived near Three Mile Island found genetic signatures indicating they may have been connected to low levels of radiation," I quote from the Newsweek article. It would be hard to place numbers on how many have died from the accident.

Here is a Wikipedia link to our US accidents: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclea..._United_States. At least three of them released radiation into our environment.
 
Old 10-23-2018, 09:51 AM
 
Location: Brooklyn, New York
3,712 posts, read 3,824,166 times
Reputation: 3505
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCforever View Post
You should think this through before you post. It's hard to envision and evacuation zone like we see around Fukushima because someone had a bad "wind spill".
And you should read what I wrote. Wind is statistically more dangerous, especially if you account for % of energy generated, even if you include Chernobyl, Fukushima, Three Mile Island, etc. Even setting aside that the turbines kill well over 300,000 birds per year in the US alone, there is a lot of human fatalities from installation and maintenance of wind turbines. Those gigantic ~30 storey turbines fail a lot more often than pretty much any other energy source, and due to people thinking they are 'safe', statistically they end up killing a lot more people.
 
Old 10-23-2018, 10:06 AM
 
Location: DC
6,509 posts, read 6,429,279 times
Reputation: 3112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gantz View Post
And you should read what I wrote. Wind is statistically more dangerous, especially if you account for % of energy generated, even if you include Chernobyl, Fukushima, Three Mile Island, etc. Even setting aside that the turbines kill well over 300,000 birds per year in the US alone, there is a lot of human fatalities from installation and maintenance of wind turbines. Those gigantic ~30 storey turbines fail a lot more often than pretty much any other energy source, and due to people thinking they are 'safe', statistically they end up killing a lot more people.
Nonsense. No more construction accidents at wind turbine sites than any other industrial site. Again, the impact of a nuclear accident is orders of magnitude greater than anything that could conceivably happen at a wind site.

Fewer birds killed by wind turbines than by tall buildings or house cats. Get some better material. Your arguments are pathetically weak.
 
Old 10-23-2018, 12:41 PM
 
Location: The Driftless Area, WI
2,769 posts, read 1,036,756 times
Reputation: 5940
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCforever View Post

The fact that a construction worker finds the quality control rules burdensome is not really a surprise. .

To get a true picture of how the war is going, ask the infantrymen, not the generals in their ivory towers. When was the last time you got any dirt under your fingernails?

Quote:
Originally Posted by fisheye View Post

Here is the one major accident that happened back in 1979: https://www.newsweek.com/three-mile-...rsary-864161..


That article from the Newsweek Journal of Pseudoscience is a summary of some COMPUTER MODEL studies. (look 'em up yourself.) The real data shoes that 1.3 in 10,000 Americans is diagnosed with thyroid every year. Even these model guess-timates say that the increase in thyroid cancer in the exposed areas would only be an increase over 30 yrs from 39 cumulative cases per 10,000 to 40.2 cases/10,000. Given the benefits of nuclear power production, perhaps that is an acceptable risk.


Like I always say, you'd never drive your car across a flimsy bridge built to the safety standards of airliner construction, but you fly all the time without concern. Everything is relative.
 
Old 10-23-2018, 01:59 PM
 
Location: Swiftwater, PA
14,284 posts, read 11,631,138 times
Reputation: 10687
Quote:
Originally Posted by guidoLaMoto View Post
That article from the Newsweek Journal of Pseudoscience is a summary of some COMPUTER MODEL studies. (look 'em up yourself.) The real data shoes that 1.3 in 10,000 Americans is diagnosed with thyroid every year. Even these model guess-timates say that the increase in thyroid cancer in the exposed areas would only be an increase over 30 yrs from 39 cumulative cases per 10,000 to 40.2 cases/10,000. Given the benefits of nuclear power production, perhaps that is an acceptable risk.


Like I always say, you'd never drive your car across a flimsy bridge built to the safety standards of airliner construction, but you fly all the time without concern. Everything is relative.
You still ignored the Wikipedia link (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclea..._United_States). The point is that accidents do happen and many of these accidents could have been much worse. We have been very lucky; that does not mean that our luck will last forever. The worst case scenario with a nuclear accident is that humans might not be able to use very large sections of land for more than one lifetime. Look at the evacuations that took place during the Fukushima disaster: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japane...clear_disaster. While some believe that it could not happen here we do have some plants close to fault lines: https://frontiergroup.org/blogs/blog...thquake-faults.

But more important than any of this; you cannot sell the public on nuclear reactors. The licensing is a complicated process (https://www.nrc.gov/images/reactors/...ng-process.gif). We have only had two new reactors in the last 20 years. While many in the industry tried to get back the momentum; it hasn't worked. Too many problems. If you go back to that Wikipedia link it tells approximately how much money it cost when things go wrong - the four most costly cleanups alone cost more that $6 billion. Nuclear is a hard sell for America!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:47 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top