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.
A majority of fracking wells experience concrete lining failure either during or after their active use, leeching chemicals into the groundwater. The operation itself despoils the land and uses up massive resources in terms of water, gasoline for hundreds of trucks per well, road building, etc. Is it worse than oil spills? I can't tell you that. It's definitely not good. We should be building nuclear but apparently we can't have nice things like that anymore.
Nuclear certainly isn't devoid of environmental concerns. We've seen what nuclear accidents (Chernobyl; Fukushima) and even nuclear tests (John Wayne; Agnes Morehead) can do to the environment and the health of the people living in those vicinities, and it's long term.
Our own Indian Point alone has had the following incidents:
In 1973, five months after Indian Point 2 opened, the plant was shut down when engineers discovered buckling in the steel liner of the concrete dome in which the nuclear reactor is housed.[10]
On October 17, 1980,[13] 100,000 gallons of Hudson River water leaked into the Indian Point 2 containment building from the fan cooling unit, undetected by a safety device designed to detect hot water. The flooding, covering the first 9 feet of the reactor vessel, was discovered when technicians entered the building. Two pumps which should have removed the water were found to be inoperative. NRC proposed a $2,100,000 fine for the incident.[14]
There was intense scrutiny of the Indian Point plant between 1993 and 1997, when it was on the Federal list of the nation's worst nuclear power plants.[15]
In February 2000, the most serious incident at the plant occurred, when a small radioactive leak from a steam generator tube forced the plant to close for 11 months.[10]
In 2001, a series of leaks sprung up in non-nuclear parts of the plant.[10]
In 2005, Entergy workers while digging discovered a small leak in a spent fuel pool. Water containing tritium and strontium-90 was leaking through a crack in the pool building "and then finding its way into the nearby Hudson River." Workers were able to keep the fuel rods "safely covered" despite the leak.[16] On March 22, 2006 The New York Times also reported finding radioactive nickel-63 and strontium in groundwater on site.[17]
In 2007 a transformer at Unit 3 caught fire, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission raised its level of inspections, because the plant had experienced many unplanned shutdowns. According to The New York Times, Indian Point "has a history of transformer problems".[4]
On April 23, 2007, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission fined the owner of the Indian Point nuclear plant $130,000 for failing to meet a deadline for a new emergency siren plan. The 150 sirens at the plant are meant to alert residents within 10 miles to a plant emergency. Since 2008, a Rockland County based private company has taken over responsibility for the infrastructure used to trigger and maintain the ATI siren system. The sirens, once plagued with failures, have functioned nearly flawlessly ever since.[18]
On January 7, 2010, NRC inspectors reported that an estimated 600,000 gallons of mildly radioactive steam was intentionally vented to the atmosphere after an automatic shutdown of Unit 2. After the vent, one of the vent valves unintentionally remained slightly open for two days. The levels of tritium in the steam were within the allowable safety limits defined in NRC standards.[19]
On November 7, 2010, an explosion occurred in the main transformer for Indian Point 2, spilling oil into the Hudson River.[20] The owner of the Indian Point nuclear plant later agreed to pay a $1.2 million penalty for the transformer explosion.[4]
In the middle of February, employee error caused an accidental shutdown of Reactor Two. This incident released no radiation.
A majority of fracking wells experience concrete lining failure either during or after their active use, leeching chemicals into the groundwater. The operation itself despoils the land and uses up massive resources in terms of water, gasoline for hundreds of trucks per well, road building, etc. Is it worse than oil spills? I can't tell you that. It's definitely not good.
There are enough "facts and figures" out there to support all points of view. One thing is for certain, whatever your point of view. Regardless of the energy source there is always a compromise. Everything, even solar, has it's liimitations and drawbacks. It's a compromise no matter what.
Nuclear certainly isn't devoid of environmental concerns. We've seen what nuclear accidents (Chernobyl; Fukushima) and even nuclear tests (John Wayne; Agnes Morehead) can do to the environment and the health of the people living in those vicinities, and it's long term.
Our own Indian Point alone has had the following incidents:
Oy what a yawn fest. Transformer problems? Seriously? That's possible at literally any power plant. Chernobyl was basically the only nuclear accident that actually killed people, but even that's been overblown and was the end result of very horrible mismanagement and a lousy design. That type of incident is impossible with modern reactor designs. Though there is certainly room for improvement in our safety regulations, the same can be said for all public works that are neglected.
Meanwhile, while you typed your post, a dozen people died in coal mining accidents and another dozen died due to air pollution. Coal plants released more radioactive material into the air than every nuclear accident ever, combined.
We need solutions now, and more hydrocarbons are not the answer. Solar and wind are not there yet. While you stress out about transformer leaks we are wasting valuable time.
Oy what a yawn fest. Transformer problems? Seriously? That's possible at literally any power plant. Chernobyl was basically the only nuclear accident that actually killed people, but even that's been overblown and was the end result of very horrible mismanagement and a lousy design. That type of incident is impossible with modern reactor designs. Though there is certainly room for improvement in our safety regulations, the same can be said for all public works that are neglected.
Meanwhile, while you typed your post, a dozen people died in coal mining accidents and another dozen died due to air pollution. Coal plants released more radioactive material into the air than every nuclear accident ever, combined.
We need solutions now, and more hydrocarbons are not the answer. Solar and wind are not there yet. While you stress out about transformer leaks we are wasting valuable time.
Excuse me sir, but this is a thread about converting from oil to gas, not about solving the world's ecological problems. You threw nuclear out there. Chernobyl killed people, so did Fukushima. There was also a spike in cancer cases in the years following the Three Mile Island accident. I'm sure you'll say that's been exaggerated the way some still say Love Canal was / is. There were quite a few bullet points that mentioned radioactive material leaking into the Hudson from Indian Point, as well as into the atmosphere, which was already going on prior to its discovery, but you want to focus only on Transformer problems? I'm sorry if reading a post that was less than one page long puts you to sleep. Hope you never have to do your own tax return or worse, read the constitution. What a yawnfest it would likely be for you to refresh your memory on what rights we have. Coal? Who mentioned that option? How many have died while you waste valuable time trying to refute me by creating one side issue after another (first nuclear, then coal, then people dying while I type)? You know what? If you don't like gas, stick with oil and wait in vain for the price to come down, or hold out hope that nuclear heat is right around the corner. I won't hold my breath. Two consecutive winters of paying insane prices based on rumors coming out of "Yemen" is enough.
Last edited by Trolling For Dollars; 08-22-2013 at 03:38 PM..
You brought your anti-nuclear agenda into the thread, I'm simply pointing out that fears over nuclear are overblown and that it's the only feasible longterm solution to our energy problems. Gas is a stopgap measure and has the added benefit of hurting the environment at home.
You brought your anti-nuclear agenda into the thread......
You brought your pro-nuclear agenda into the thread, and you "pointing out" your opinion doesn't make "my fears" overblown, especially since you didn't bother trying to refute any of it.
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.
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.
